Pariah Nation

Summary

For Heaven's Sake Podcast: Episode Summary - Pariah Nation

Podcast Information:

• Title: For Heaven's Sake
• Hosts: Donniel Hartman and Yossi Klein Halevi
• Produced By: Shalom Hartman Institute and ARC Media
• Episode Title: Pariah Nation
• Release Date: July 9, 2025

---

Introduction to the Pariah Nation Concept

In this poignant episode titled Pariah Nation, hosts Donniel Hartman and Yossi Klein Halevi delve into the evolving global perception of Israel amidst ongoing conflicts. The conversation centers around the alarming shift in international sentiment, positioning Israel alongside traditionally isolated nations such as Russia, North Korea, Afghanistan, and Iran.

Donniel Hartman initiates the discussion by highlighting Israel's new categorization as a pariah nation:

“It's Becoming established that we are a pariah, that we are a morally failing nation...” ([02:00])

He underscores the pervasive nature of this stigma, noting incidents where Israel faces ostracism globally, including major retailers like Coop in England placing Israel in a list of nations they refuse to stock.

---

Global Shifts in Perception

Sami Jenich provides historical context, comparing the current situation to past events that have isolated Israel internationally. He recalls the aftermath of the Six-Day War in 1967, a time when Diaspora Jews felt a renewed sense of pride and security in Israel, bolstering their global standing.

“If Jews felt safer because of the Six Day War, Jews now feel immeasurably less safe because of this war.” ([07:34])

This contrasts sharply with today's scenario, where Israelis and Jews worldwide grapple with decreased solidarity and heightened criticism.

---

Drivers Behind Israel's Pariah Status

The hosts explore multiple factors contributing to this shift:

1. The Social Media War: Sami Jenich identifies the unprecedented nature of the current conflict as the "first major social media war," where the intensity and immediacy of online discourse amplify negative perceptions.

   “The Palestinian cause has four or five extremely evocative words... social media tells you, no, it's not.” ([15:26])

   He points out that while Israel has more complex narratives, social media favors succinct, emotionally charged messaging, disadvantaging nuanced explanations.

2. Western Perceptions and Historical Antisemitism: Aligning with Daniil Hartman, Sami discusses how Western societies have lower tolerance for perceived abuses by nations they view as allies or part of their moral community. This is compounded by deep-seated antisemitic sentiments that subtly resurface through critiques rooted in longstanding prejudices.

   “The west defined itself by, against the Jews... that doesn't go away.” ([19:57])

3. Israel as a Jewish State: The unique position of Israel as the Jewish state adds layers of complexity. Unlike other nations isolated for political reasons, Israel’s identity intertwines with global Jewish identity, leading to internal and external conflicts over representation and moral responsibility.

   “The great success of Zionism is... Jews around the world are uncomfortable.” ([05:45])

4. Government Policy and Moral Credibility: The current Israeli government's policies, especially in conflict zones like Gaza, have eroded moral credibility. Daniil Hartman criticizes leaders for lacking a coherent strategy that balances security with ethical considerations, exacerbating international disdain.

   “Starving Gazans is a moral abomination...” ([34:11])

---

Historical Parallels and Shifts

Sami Jenich draws parallels to past instances where Israel faced international isolation, such as post-Yom Kippur War in 1973 and the Lebanon War in 1982. He notes that while Israel managed to regain some standing through initiatives like the Oslo Accords, the current situation is unprecedented in its severity and global reach.

“Oslo was an Israeli initiative. Now, I have tremendous criticism of Oslo, but it did break the vice around Israel.” ([29:21])

This historical perspective underscores the vulnerability of Israel’s international standing and the challenges in reversing the current negative trend.

---

Pathways to Overcoming Isolation

The conversation shifts towards potential solutions and strategies to reclaim Israel's global reputation:

1. Policy Reforms in Conflict Zones: Daniil Hartman emphasizes the need for Israel to transition from a "warrior nation" to one that actively pursues peace, even amidst ongoing threats. He advocates for a moral reorientation in policies towards Gaza and the West Bank as essential to restoring international trust.

   “We have to be a moral partner again in our policies and also in our vision.” ([32:00])

2. Expanding the Abraham Accords: While Sami Jenich acknowledges the significance of the Abraham Accords, he suggests that without substantive changes in Israeli policies, particularly regarding Palestinian statehood, such diplomatic efforts may fall short.

   “Peace with those parts of the Arab world that are open to joining the Abraham Accords is not out of our hands.” ([28:45])

3. Balancing Security and Ethical Responsibility: The hosts agree on the necessity of maintaining Israel’s security while simultaneously addressing moral challenges. Sami Jenich proposes that Israel can embody both a warrior and a peace-seeker, ensuring that ethical governance complements national defense.

   “The transition we need to make is not from warrior nation to peace nation, but to be simultaneously warrior nation and pursuers of peace.” ([35:20])

---

Conclusion and Final Reflections

As the episode concludes, Donniel Hartman reflects on the immediate challenges Israel faces, including ongoing military conflicts and their implications on global perceptions.

“The weeks ahead are going to be potentially very momentous... May we have good news.” ([36:44])

The discussion encapsulates a critical juncture for Israel, urging introspection and strategic shifts to navigate its pariah status and rebuild international alliances.

---

Notable Quotes:

• Donniel Hartman ([02:00]): “It's Becoming established that we are a pariah, that we are a morally failing nation...”
• Sami Jenich ([07:34]): “If Jews felt safer because of the Six Day War, Jews now feel immeasurably less safe because of this war.”
• Sami Jenich ([15:26]): “The Palestinian cause has four or five extremely evocative words... social media tells you, no, it's not.”
• Daniil Hartman ([34:11]): “Starving Gazans is a moral abomination...”
• Sami Jenich ([35:20]): “The transition we need to make is not from warrior nation to peace nation, but to be simultaneously warrior nation and pursuers of peace.”

---

This episode of For Heaven's Sake offers a sobering analysis of Israel's current global standing, dissecting the multifaceted reasons behind its pariah status and proposing thoughtful pathways toward reconciliation and renewed international respect.

Transcript

[Sami Jenich]

Foreign.

[Anna Weiss]

You are listening to an art media podcast.

[Daniil Hartman]

Hi, friends. This is Daniil Hartman and Yossi Klein Alevi from the Sholem Hartman Institute. And this is our podcast, for heaven's sake, the special edition Israel at War, which is a joint production of the Hartman Institute and ARC Media. And Today is day 641. But before we begin with today's topic, I just want to take a quick break for our audience to hear about a new podcast from the Sholem Hartman Institute entitled Future Tense.

[Anna Weiss]

I have a lot of adults and parents asking me, how is it? Is everything okay? Are there encampments? Are there protests? They ask us and then they still don't listen.

[Sami Jenich]

I want to agree with you fully, but I think there is something that makes me a bit uncomfortable pushing back in the most respectful way possible.

[Daniil Hartman]

Respectful.

[Anna Weiss]

I'm an Israeli.

[Sami Jenich]

I'm Sami Jenich.

[Daniil Hartman]

I'm indeed Orla.

[Anna Weiss]

I'm Anna Weiss. And this is Future Tense, a new show from the Shalom Hartman Institute that puts the big Jewish questions of today into the hands of the leaders of tomorrow. Hosts Sami Yadid and Anna sit down with Hartman scholars like Yehuda Kertzer.

[Daniil Hartman]

Do people actually want to be shapers.

[Sami Jenich]

Of the societies that they're in?

[Anna Weiss]

Alana Steinhein. I think that it's worth actually asking.

[Daniil Hartman]

People what happens when their commitments do conflict.

[Anna Weiss]

And Danielle Hartman.

[Daniil Hartman]

It's not like I just push a button called pluralism and everything follows to.

[Sami Jenich]

Discuss things like your identity, serious contradictions.

[Anna Weiss]

Like a filta fish tasting.

[Daniil Hartman]

Why do we want to have Jewish spaces?

[Anna Weiss]

There is no one Judaism. My values in the realm of feminism.

[Daniil Hartman]

This better Jewish future.

[Anna Weiss]

Who should sit around the table? Listen to Future Tense, available wherever you get your podcasts.

[Daniil Hartman]

It's a terrific new podcast. There's a lot of groundbreaking features to it. Also, I was the first guest, so. And I had a great time on the episode. Can we get along?

[Sami Jenich]

I'm have to break my policy and listen to a podcast and listen to a podcast.

[Daniil Hartman]

And by the way, it's now available. You all know this. Wherever you get your podcasts, it's nice adding another voice to the conversation. And this is a really very important one. Today's conversation is an extension of one that we had sometime in the past. I don't know when, where. We spoke about a nation that dwells alone or apart. And our theme today is pariah nation because our sense together is that Israel has now shifted to another place. We're not just alone and we're not apart or separate. It's Becoming established that we are a pariah, that we are a morally failing.

[Sami Jenich]

Nation, that we should perceive, perceived.

[Daniil Hartman]

Though I'm not talking about our perception, but thank you for protecting me. And if somebody was going to judge me about for that, as we say in Yiddish, gesunde hate, knock yourself out. You know, but you know, there's this co op group in England, major, major food distribution that has now five nations whose food it won't put on its shelves. Russia, North Korea, Afghanistan, Iran, Israel. We're now in the opening five. We're in the opening five. And what's inspired us is both the Israeli press, which every day is reporting about some incident around the world where Israel's attack at a conference or at a concert or Israelis are harassed. There's an increased sense of it's not just isolation, something deep is happening that we need to understand and talk about. And the second motivation was a really very interesting article in the New York Times which basically posited that Israel's engagement in this war in order to achieve victory, in which it did achieve a profound victory against the enemies that endangered us, has undermined Israel's right to defend itself and in many ways to exist across the world. The solidarity, the sympathy for Israel is at all time lows, all time lows. We're not talking about communist blocs, third world nations, you know, those who vote on a regular basis to condemn Israel all the time in the United nations. Or you know, the fact that Libya or the ex Libya, which was once the chair of the Human Rights Commission of the UN felt that Israel was violating human rights. You know, okay, I'm not worried about Gaddafi, Allah v' shalom of blessed memory, what he felt about us. But now it's our friends, it's England, forget Turkey, Greece, the favorite country for Israelis to travel now, 70 something percent Australia, all over the world, 70% are opposed to us, are opposed or look at us unfavorably. It's just all over. And you know, we get responses from our listeners all over the world. And you know, sometimes you and I, because we grew up in North America, we tend to be overly North American centric. And I apologize to our audience. It's the experience we know the best. But many of you come from so many countries like, I don't know, 60, 70 countries around the world have been ranking us number one in Judaism podcast. I didn't even know there were Jews there. I think maybe someone flew over while they were.

[Sami Jenich]

Cape Verde, we're talking about you. This is a shout out for you.

[Daniil Hartman]

But we have friends in Australia and Colombia and so many countries where you're feeling this, that being a pariah nation. It's not just Israel now is a pariah nation. The nation are the Jews. And one of the great successes of Zionism is the fact that Israel is the public face of the Jewish people. Wasn't always that way. And there are Jews who want to separate them, even if there's loyalty. Okay, you want to be anti Israel, but why are you anti Semitic? That whole association. But an Iranian could go and try to burn down a synagogue in Australia, in Melbourne, fighting what is the relationship. But it is this pariah nation is something that that's sitting on us. Jews around the world are uncomfortable. Israel is increasingly feeling it. We have ministers in the government saying we have to look at the war in Gaza because I'm not sure that the benefits outweigh the price that we're paying now. For Israelis, it's a security issue. It's a strategic issue for North American Jews and Jews around the world very often, far more acutely, it's an issue of personal security. It's friendships, it's alliances. It's not easy, you know, when the country that I love and that I have so many aspirations for is taken as self evident as pariah nation, you know, as part of the whole litany of apartheid, genocide, colonialism, all of that. The success of the movements is deeply troubling. And I want us to talk about it. I want to talk about how we feel about it, what we think the causes are and what is it that we can possibly repair. So let's start. Yossi, what's your take on this new story?

[Sami Jenich]

Well, you said something very interesting, that it wasn't always the case that Diaspora Jews were automatically identified with Israel by the larger society. And the turning point was 1967, the Six Day War. And I remember it, you probably remember it too. And Diaspora Jews wanted one thing. They wanted to touch the glow of Israel. They wanted to bask in the success of Israel Diaspora Jews. And I certainly know this from the American Jewish community. And I'm sure it was true all over the world. Walk taller. In 1967 we did that. That was our victory. I remember my father, who was a salesman, he would come back and saying, you know, my non Jewish customers were congratulating me. You know, Mr. Klein, you, what a, what a great thing you did.

[Daniil Hartman]

You know Nathan Sharansky, I forget in which book, but he has this great section in which he speaks about how I didn't know what it Meant to be a Jew, but I know we won. And he speaks about standing taller.

[Sami Jenich]

You know, I remember the line he said, when I heard that the Temple Mount was in our hands, I was so excited, even though I didn't know what the Temple Mount was.

[Daniil Hartman]

It's in our hands. It was like it did that. Yes, I'm sorry, continue.

[Sami Jenich]

And so what we're experiencing now, especially in the Diaspora, is the anti Six Day War. This is the antithesis of that experience. And if Jews felt safer because of the Six Day War, Jews now feel immeasurably less safe because of this war. There's something as well that's particularly cruel for Israel in the aftermath of October 7th. Zionism. And we've spoken about this a lot. Zionism promised the Jews, among any number of things, it also promised the Jews that it would protect us, give us the means for self defense, the means to feel safer and also to become part of the international community. What broke down after October 7th was the harmony between these two goals. And gradually, as this war has dragged on, we've come to realize we have to choose between safety and international acceptance. And that's a devil's choice. There's no good answer there. So, yes, Israelis, if you push them to the wall, they'll say, well, of course we're going to choose physical safety. And that is the choice we made. But at what a price. And so the tragedy is that if you're going to fight this kind of war, if you're going to fight terrorists, terrorist entities on our border, then in the end the nature of that war will determine your isolation. And you can't have it both ways.

[Daniil Hartman]

See here I want to disagree with you a little bit. I agree. On the one hand, I want to start by disagreeing with you, by telling what I agree with is that in the choice between safety and international acceptance, I think the essence of Zionism is to say, yes, really, really, this is, you know, and in this article in the New York Times, that's the last line of amidror at the end. I'm always gonna pick safety. But I think we give ourselves a break by making that dichotomy.

[Sami Jenich]

Before you say that, I just want to comment on what you just said, which is that international acceptance is part of keeping us safe. And so the dichotomy between security and acceptance is actually false.

[Daniil Hartman]

That's correct too. We very often forget that as well. But the big shift that's been taking place now is not the way anti Semites are now raising their head. We're losing a lot of friends. That's part of it. It's the people who weren't. It's Holland, it's England, it's Greece, it's France, it's North America. I'm not talking about people who had a predisposition to be anti Israel. We're talking about people who were so strongly in the pro Israel camp. So my first take on it is that for so many Israelis it's perceived as inevitable. And I think the dichotomy that you presented is one of the ways that we sort of forgive it. And I think one of the challenges, I think one of the things that we decided on October 7th was that we're going to fight a war in a way, regardless of what people think about us. I don't think we imagined a 641 day war and three week wars, shorter wars, you could handle this. But I think Israel basically decided that it's going to put this whole conversation on hold for so many reasons. And we'll get to them in a moment. But there is this dichotomy that I think is unnecessary and it's what I want to talk about because let's move to the next step.

[Sami Jenich]

But the problem is that there are good reasons for that dichotomy. That when you fight a war against a terrorist organization that is embedded in a civilian population, the very nature of an asymmetrical war leads to this kind of media coverage. And so leaving aside the question for a moment of how we're fighting the war and whether we've lived up to our own standards, the very nature of this kind of war works against you.

[Daniil Hartman]

That's true. This war is a harder war. And I think we weren't prepared at all. And I don't think we even thought about how we present what it is that we're doing to the world. But that's all leading us to the next step. And I'm not interested in, as you said, this is not a conversation about what Israel did with this or that. But if you're going to engage in this type of war in this impossible terrain, part of what you have to think about, especially when we take into account what you said and that is that world opinion is an integral part of our strategic well being, that our safety. You know, part of me, I see Israelis who for months, maybe even a year ignored it. They didn't want to hear about it, they didn't want to talk about it. Now all the press is talking about it. There's even a new term in Israel. I don't know if you heard it. Do you know the term jetless? It's a play on jet lag. Jet lag, we all know jetless is.

[Sami Jenich]

We have nowhere to go.

[Daniil Hartman]

I'm stuck in Israel. So it's part of a commercial for withdrawal from the duty free shop in Ben Gurion Airport. Not that I know of anybody sane who thinks that that's a good place to buy something. I hope no one will sue us. But jetless. The world is shrinking on us and Israelis are feeling it. They're shrinking on us. People are turning against us wherever we go. You can't wear your kippahs, you can't speak Hebrew. We're being attacked at every single concert. Should we participate? Are we allowed to participate in these sports events, etc. So my first take is that it's hitting Israelis in a way that we were completely unprepared. And the violence we experienced on October 7th we thought would give us immunity, maybe in a certain sense. But now let's get into the causes. We're not Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan, Russia. We're not. Or at least our perception is that it's so clear that we're not. We know all the differences. So let's try to understand why this is happening, because I don't want to blame, because I want the next step to say, what could we do differently? So how do you understand why this is happening?

[Sami Jenich]

There are at least three reasons that come to mind. One is that it seems to me that this is the first major social media war, right? This is the first conflict that has really been covered in the most minute way. You know, we've. I remember when CNN began broadcasting 24 hours a day and, and we were under that kind of scrutiny. That was nothing. This is a microscope. And we were not ready for a social media war. And we're still not. And in the social media war, the side that has the shortest number of words, buzzwords is going to win. And the Palestinian cause has it, hands down. They have four or five extremely evocative words. And Jews, we have stories, we have speech, we have stories. You know, in 1947 we accepted partition. Right. You know, they did it, 1937. And you're in social media, you start talking about 1947, you're dead. And you know, it's funny, I look at X and many of the Jews on X have threads.

[Daniil Hartman]

You know, X is what used to be called. Oh, that's Twitter.

[Sami Jenich]

Okay.

[Daniil Hartman]

Yeah.

[Sami Jenich]

So you don't just have a tweet. Right? The Pro Palestinian movement. They have tweets or an image, we have threads, you know, 14 points. And, and it's true. You have to, because that's, that's the only way to tell the Jewish story truthfully. It's complicated and social media tells you, no, it's not. So that's one reason. That's a technical reason. There are, I think, at least two other reasons. One is that we're a Western country and there's much less tolerance in the west for abuses, real or perceived, committed by a Western country than by others. Partly it's because of self loathing, partly it's because of higher expectations. Higher expectations. The third reason is we're a Jewish country. And I deliberately put that third because unlike many Israelis who would put that first, I don't believe it's the first reason, but it's certainly part of the mix. And I think that much of the hostility against us, against the Jewish state, is unconscious and it's borrowed from 2000 years of contempt for Judaism and the Jewish people, which seemingly disappeared in the last 50, 70 years. But you can erase that cumulative impact on the Western psyche. David Nirenberg wrote a book called Anti Judaism, one of the most important, the most important book on antisemitism that I've ever read. And his argument is that you can't understand the west over the course of 2000 years. And he includes the Muslim world in this without understanding Anti Judaism. And that's the term he uses. He said that the west, at every stage of, of its development, defined itself by, against the Jews, whatever it imagined the Jews or Judaism to be, that's not us. Whether it was Christianity or we were a significant other. We were the, according to Nirenberg, we were the significant other. And so that doesn't go away. You know, I can hear the Christian contempt of 2000 years in much of the criticism. Sometimes it's overt. And I'll see posts on X that look at the chosen people. Here they are, you know, we're unmasking the chosen people. Sometimes it's more subtle where what you feel is Christian supersessionism, which was the old way in which the church related to the Jewish people, which is that we don't belong in our story anymore. Our story has been transferred to the church, the biblical story. It's not the Hebrew Bible anymore, it's their Bible. And I feel that when I, when I see how the land and the history of this land, the ownership, the identity of the land has passed out of our hands and even The Holocaust doesn't belong to us anymore.

[Daniil Hartman]

You know, that was literally what Tucker Carlson said to Ted Cruz, who was quoting Genesis 12:3, I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you. And Tucker said to him, who does that apply to? And he said it applies to Israel. And he said, israel is the state of Israel.

[Sami Jenich]

Right. And by extension, it's the people of Israel. No, here it is. Certainly not.

[Daniil Hartman]

I could buy, like we've replaced the essence of that is to replace that. I want to take a slightly different dimension. It follows your first point, but from a different way. And it has to do with the way we engage in talking about the serious moral challenges that our friends are posing towards Israel and which has caused our failure to motivate their alienation from Israel and to accelerate it. Part of the challenge we face is that we're not accused of doing something wrong. The things that we do wrong. What did you call them?

[Sami Jenich]

Buzzwords?

[Daniil Hartman]

Buzzwords. They're not just buzzwords. There's legal terms now. Genocide, apartheid, colonialism. And these words are now embodied by Israel. The great success of the anti Zionist campaign, much of it anti Semitic. But these words have now become very commonplace. These are the words which, of course, you know, you're at a concert and you say, an end to genocide, end to Israel, and you know, kill, idf. It's like these are the words, these are the language words that are now carrying the criticism against Israel. And part of the challenge of these terms is that each one of these terms has a very specific legal definition to it. Genocide. What does that mean? It involves an intent to eradicate a people in all or in some, in part. But it's not about the amount of people you kill, it's about the intent. Apartheid has a whole list of systemic racial discrimination, colonialism also. I don't want to. It's not the time right now to go through each category, but each one has a very explicit, specific academic and or legal definition to it. But the critique against us, and this is what makes it so complicated, is happening on multiple levels. On the one hand, it's happening in courts, including the Hague, or in the courts of university discourse, on the one hand. And on the other hand, there's the meaning of these terms in the public marketplace. Now, what's devastating is that there's a crossover, is that genocide could be used in a legal court and then we could engage in a legal debate, but when it crosses into the public domain, it has a different meaning. It's not about what your intent is. These Terms are suggestive and indicative of a sense that you are a morally flawed or failed actor.

[Sami Jenich]

And they're emotional terms.

[Daniil Hartman]

And they're emotional terms. That's also their power. They're about. There's something horrific about you. There's something essentially wrong with what. When you shift to those terms, they're more than just a condemnation of what you do to a depiction of who you are. And I think a lot of the conversation emanating out of Israel and a lot of the pro Israel discourse as we try to defend ourselves against these attacks is that we think we're in a court of law. We're all lawyers, so we're giving legal arguments. Oh, it's not genocide. Don't you know, the case of humanitarian aid is a perfect example. Legally, it's, you know, our colleague shares with us. It's not even complicated that no nation has a legal responsibility under international law to provide humanitarian aid, which is then taken by the enemy who you are fighting against in the midst of war and so doing, strengthening and prolonging the war.

[Sami Jenich]

Something that Hamas sees as like, that's an example.

[Daniil Hartman]

So, like here, it's so legally. Could we argue this international? Of course we can. But like, people are saying, what's wrong with you? You're starving people. Didn't you see the picture? You're starving people. So we are offering legal arguments. And when somebody is presenting to you a moral critique, a profound moral question, and you respond with legalisms, people feel that, where's your soul?

[Sami Jenich]

I think that's a great insight. Where soul is God. It's a very, very important insight. And look, you know, to take the point a step further, what people have been seeing on their social media feeds for the last year and a half are not just the Palestinian buzzwords. They've been seeing images of burned children. And so what do we say to that? Well, October 7th, you know, you.

[Daniil Hartman]

Or this, or let me give you the legal definition. Could I teach a little bit of Torah? I don't know if I ever taught it to our audience, and if I did, it's just such a profound piece of Torah that I want to share.

[Sami Jenich]

I forget you're a rabbi.

[Daniil Hartman]

You forget that I'm a rabbi? Yes. There's a very famous. One of the early rabbinic figures in the Talmud is someone by the name of Shimon Ben Shetach. Shimon, the son of Shatach, who, like all rabbis of his time, worked for a living because the rabbinic tradition was frightened of people being paid for being a rabbi. So that those who had money might control them and you had to make a living. And he worked in cotton, which was a very, very tedious, time consuming activity. Not that I know, but you know, in theory. And the student said, let's buy our teacher a donkey so he can do it much more quickly, then he could spend more time with us. And they go and they buy him a donkey. It's in the Jerusalem Talmud. And on the donkey there's a precious jewel hidden in a pouch on his neck. And the students say, rabbi, we had a miracle. Look, you don't even have to work anymore. You can now teach us and we can learn from you. And they bought this donkey from a pagan who lived in the Holy Land at the time, and this is pre Christianity. And he said, did he know about it when you bought the donkey and paid X, Y or Z, did he know that there was a precious jewel here? And they said, no. So Shimon has give it back. A few hundred years later, the Talmud asked, why do you have to do it? Under Jewish law, pagans, you don't have to return their lost property. If they're idol worshipers, you don't have any moral responsibility to care or take care of them. So like legally you're fine, you're covered. And Talmud says, what did Shimon say? He says, what do you think? You think I'm a barbarian? I'm a barbarian. He says, I'm not interested in what the legal conversation is. What type of people do we have to be? And I feel that we have missed the depth of the criticism. Part of it is because of your third reason. And that's what makes it even more confusing, because we don't know who's coming at us. There's anti Semitism, there's so many causes. But I think we have missed a core level of a conversation. And as a result, people are looking at us and saying there's something flawed.

[Sami Jenich]

And of course, one more factor, which is our government that at the moment when we most desperately needed a government of moral credibility, we have Smotrich and.

[Daniil Hartman]

Ben Grier and they're the worst. They're the worst. Like you compare, we've said this in the past, you compare the way Netanyahu spoke to Lebanon when he said to the Lebanese before attacking, we have no claim on Lebanon, we are not at war with the Lebanese people. When did he ever even try to say such a thing towards Gazans or Gaza and all of that? So that leads to the last part. It's all of the above. I'm not sure if from your list there's anything we can do about it, but I still want to challenge you because there's something inevitable about your list that's almost deterministic in the world we live in.

[Sami Jenich]

I think our two lists have to be combined. Have to be combined to really get a sense.

[Daniil Hartman]

That's correct. It's not an either or. Absolutely. When I was listening to you, I was saying, yeah, I agree with that. Even though that's not. I don't feel that. But I thank you because that's. To take all the responsibility is just, you know, it's just too much. So in all of the above, then, some suggestions on I don't want to be pariah nation. Is there a way to win or is this now, is it too late? Is it inevitable? Maybe time will heal, Maybe a new Abraham Accords, an end of a war. So then again, it's determined, it's out of our hands, just wherever events go, or is there something that we could do?

[Sami Jenich]

Well, I think peace with those parts of the Arab world that are open to joining the Abraham Accords is not out of our hands. I think it's very much in our hands.

[Daniil Hartman]

Interesting.

[Sami Jenich]

It's going to be playing out in Gaza. What we choose to do or don't do in Gaza in the coming weeks will have a very, very big influence on whether we can move in that direction. And you know, I'm thinking of the historic precedents. Israel has been in a pariah situation in the past. I don't think it's been quite as severe as this.

[Daniil Hartman]

But this isn't the first time.

[Sami Jenich]

It's not the first time. It is the first time we find ourselves pariahs in, in America, we were pariahs in Europe after the Yom Kippur War in 1973 and especially after the Lebanon War in 1982. And, and of course, in much of the developing world after the Yom Kippur War, almost the entire continent of Africa broke off relations with us, which was a tremendous blow to us. Israel had invested enormous resources in cultivating African American leaders and the younger generation. And then the Arab oil boycott in 1973 erased all of those achievements. And so when I think back to the winter of 1973, with the Arab oil boycott and one country after another breaking diplomatic relations and Europe suddenly discovering the moral imperative of the Palestinian cause in direct response to losing access to Arab oil, and so there was that sense of we're pariahs, but we knew that we were right. We had been attacked in 1973. And we had responded and we had come very close to winning. The argument can be made that we did win on the battlefield, very similar to today, but we were losing in world opinion, but not in America. Again, that's the biggest change. 1982. If you look at the trajectory from 1973, it was temporarily broken in 1977 when Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin made peace. Then we went through a new wave of being a pariah nation. 1982, Lebanon accelerating through the 1980s, increasing with the settlement building and. And then culminating with the first intifada in the late 1980s, which was a low point in Israel's position in the world. What turned that around? Oslo. Yitzhak Rabin and Oslo. Exactly. And the fall of the Soviet Union. So that part, of course, was out of our hands, but Oslo was an Israeli initiative. Now, I have tremendous criticism of Oslo, but it did break the vise around Israel. And my hope now is that some similar dynamic can happen, but on a much larger scale and much more successfully by expanding the Abraham Accords. What's your. How do you see that? How do you see us breaking that?

[Daniil Hartman]

I believe that the expansion of the Abraham Accords isn't going to make a difference.

[Sami Jenich]

Saudi Arabia in the West.

[Daniil Hartman]

In the west, because they don't hold these countries as morally significant others. I think the only difference, and this is the case of Oslo, is if we change our policies in Gaza and in the west bank or Judea and Samaria, and they might be, if they're connected to each other, then that will change it. But I think Israel has to move from being warrior nation to pursuers of peace. Like in our Persona that our Persona has to be one where we convince the world that we're serious about this. And it could be that it's going to take time. And I think people accept that things aren't simple here. People could accept that it's complicated, but they have to know what you want. And I think part of Overcoming Pariah Nation is offering a vision of an inspiring of what we want, of what we want for Gazans, what we want for Palestinians. What do we want? It doesn't mean I can get. It doesn't mean, you know, I might want something for Gazans. But if Hamas is still there, what are you expecting for me? But what do you want? What do you want for innocent cousins? What do you. What are your hopes for them? And we have to talk that way. And I think our government doesn't talk that way because there is no strategy or policy about where to go. We're just sort of plodding along, waiting to see what's going to unfold. Now, we might be innovative with Saudi Arabia, but the interesting move will be, are we willing to pay a price? Because what happens if Saudi Arabia says, okay, show me progress on a Palestinian state and I'll begin to embrace you? Are you willing to make that move now? I think the only person in Israel who can make that move is Netanyahu. I don't think Gantz or Lapid and certainly not Bennett have the courage and the vision. There's a part of Netanyahu who was very much like Shimon Peres. There's a part of him I heard recently Michael Goodman and I had a conversation about this, and he was speaking about the affinity between Netanyahu and Paris in that larger vision. And I don't mean to aggravate you by saying anything positive about it. I can see. I was watching your body language, Daniel.

[Sami Jenich]

I can take a lot.

[Daniil Hartman]

I'm taking this. I'm taking it back because I don't want to get into a. But there is a moment, but I don't think that's going to make a difference unless we don't seriously address in our aspirations a changing of those policies, which are morally challenging, problematic, even if they're not your fault. You know, starving Gazans is not. Maybe it's not. You can talk. Is it our fault? At the end of the day, there's a moral abomination happening. You know, you could talk, you and I could debate, are we occupying the west bank or Judea and Samaria or not? There's a people being occupied. There's something going on. And where does morality come back into our aspirations, but with realpolitik? And Netanyahu doesn't talk that way. Gantz doesn't talk that way. Lapid doesn't talk about that way. The only one who talks that way is Yair Golan and Naftali. Bennett doesn't want to participate in that conversation. And I think we could win back friends. We're never going to win back enemies. But we have to be a friend. We have to be a moral partner again in our policies and also in our vision. Any final thoughts you have on this.

[Sami Jenich]

I would just offer one modification on what you said, and I think you would agree with this, which is the transition we need to make is not from warrior nation to peace nation, pursuers of peace or pursuers of peace, but to be simultaneously warrior nation and pursuers of peace. Because of where we live and the threats against us, which are not going away and it's not either or.

[Daniil Hartman]

Fair enough.

[Sami Jenich]

And that's why I knew you would. I knew you would. I, that was an easy one. So, so I, this was, this was great. And I, I really, really appreciate your, your insights.

[Daniil Hartman]

Thank you. It's a pleasure being with you. Friends. This is for heaven's sake, day641. The weeks ahead are going to be potentially very momentous. We're taping a day after Netanyahu had dinner with President Trump. We expected announcements, but then we were told not to expect. So it might not be this week, it might be next week. In the meantime today, five soldiers were killed and 50 hostages are still there and Gazans are still starving. Whoever's responsible and we still don't have a resolution and all this is unfolding and we have to watch. And as we say in Hebrew, may we have, may we have good news. Thank you, Yossi, very much.

[Sami Jenich]

Thank you.