Trump's Board of Peace - and Unholy Listeners' Therapy with Dr. Orna Guralnik

Summary

Unholy: Two Jews on the News

Episode: Trump's Board of Peace – and Unholy Listeners' Therapy with Dr. Orna Guralnik

Date: January 23, 2026
Hosts: Yonit Levi (Channel 12, Israel) & Jonathan Freedland (The Guardian, UK)
Special Guest: Dr. Orna Guralnik (Clinical Psychologist & Host of Couples Therapy)

---

Overview:

This week’s episode of Unholy is a rich tapestry of urgent news and heartfelt listener engagement. The first half is devoted to the extraordinary events at Davos, particularly the unveiling of Donald Trump’s "Board of Peace" – a bold, controversial move to reconstruct the international order with a focus on Gaza and Israel but ambitions much broader. The hosts scrutinize the implications for Israel, the Jewish world, and the global order.

The latter half pivots to the emotional and social fissures post-October 7th in Jewish and Israeli life, as Dr. Orna Guralnik guides listeners through "Unholy listeners' therapy." In a groundbreaking segment, Dr. Guralnik joins two young listeners for a live therapy session on bridging divides created by the Israel/Palestine conflict, offering wisdom on dialogue, friendship, and reconciliation.

---

Section I: News Discussion: The Trump "Board of Peace" (04:55–26:48)

Davos Drama: The "Board of Peace" Revealed

• Context: At Davos, Trump unveils a new international body, the "Board of Peace” – originally conceived as a postwar governance mechanism for Gaza but now pitched as a UN alternative.
• Structure: Heavily bureaucratic, with an executive board (Kushner, Rubio, Tony Blair, etc.), an Office of the High Representative, and technical subcommittees – with Trump as "President" for life (even after leaving U.S. presidency) and the power to appoint his successor.
• Logo: The branding is styled after the UN’s, but dipped in gold and focused on the U.S. – “imagine the UN logo dipped in gold...the map at the center showing basically America and the rest of the world slightly squeezed out" – Freedland, [06:07].
• Membership: Billion-dollar “pay to play” for permanent seats; Qatar, Turkey, Egypt involved, as well as ambitious invitations to autocratic leaders.

Israeli Perspectives & Concerns

• Israeli Scepticism: Division between pro- and anti-Netanyahu ("Bibi") camps over the implications for Israel and Gaza.
  • Netanyahu supporters claim: "This is what you get when you call for ‘just end the war and bring back the hostages’" – Levy, [10:12].
  • Opponents argue: “We said you have no strategy...bring in the Palestinian Authority into Gaza to replace Hamas” – Levy, [10:27].
• Security Issues: Fears over Qatar/Turkey involvement in Gaza (“worrying from the Israeli perspective,” [09:47]), skepticism over the practicality of removing Hamas.
• Symbolic Actions: Rafah border crossing soon to reopen under Trump’s edict, overruling previous Israeli conditions.
• Bureaucracy Irony: “You’d have thought the business mindset would be let’s cut through all the UN bureaucracy, not set up more,” quips Freedland, [12:14].

Key Quotes & Perspectives

• On Transactionalism:
  “Donald Trump is transactional. He gives to those people who can profit him the most...those Gulf states...Netanyahu gives me a headache.” – Freedland, [19:45]
• On Israeli Leverage:
  “After October 7th, [Netanyahu] brought the Americans in very, very unprecedentedly from the very beginning. Now he has even less leverage to tell Trump what to do.” – Levy, [17:26]
• Specter of a Palestinian State:
  “What if...those Gulf states say: we have to have language on Palestinian statehood, now? Trump listens to those people...he can turn on a dime if it suits him.” – Freedland, [18:53]
• Iron Dome Credit Dispute:
  “I told Bibi stop taking credit for the Iron Dome. That’s our technology.” – Trump (quoted by Levy, [16:27]); “No, it’s not...Iron Dome is Israeli developed” – Levy.

Election Dynamics in Israel

• Political Realignment:
  • Former Chief of Staff Eisenkot proposes a “big joint party” to challenge Netanyahu; uncertainty around unity vs. fragmentation in the opposition.
  • Benny Gantz positions as possible ‘Netanyahu-sans-far-right’ unity government leader: “He’s counting on those people who will say, I’m okay with Netanyahu being PM, just not this extreme government” – Levy, [27:02].
  • The anti-Netanyahu camp, however, is described as in “disarray,” bolstering’s Netanyahu’s standing, [27:33].

---

Section II: Unholy Listeners' Therapy with Dr. Orna Guralnik (28:58–74:51)

Introduction: Fractured Relationships Post-10/7

• Widespread reports from listeners of deep rifts in families and friendships, inside and beyond the Jewish world.
• Goal: Create a model for bridging differences through open, respectful conversation, guided by Dr. Orna Guralnik.

Dr. Guralnik’s Insights on Conflict and Dialogue

• Foundational Approach:
  “The idea of separating out the very specific content that you might disagree on and the process that you’re moving through to have the conversation is super important.” – Guralnik, [00:00], repeated [72:04]

• Principles for Difficult Conversations:

  • Focus on process as much as substance
  • Recognize and respect lived histories and perspectives
  • The goal isn’t to ‘win’ but to understand and expand perspective
  • Compassion and curiosity over judgment

Case Study: Benjamin and Albert, Danish High School Friends (35:11–67:21)

Background:

• Benjamin: 19, Danish-Israeli heritage, identifies Jewishly, strong connection to Israel.
• Albert: 18, Jewish lineage but secular, little personal connection to Israel, emphasizes justice.

Their Disagreement:

• Clashes over the West Bank, Gaza war, Nakba—intentions vs. consequences.
• Benjamin: “I focus a lot on intention...Albert focuses more on consequences” [37:33]
• Albert: “What’s actually happening?” [37:40]

The Strength of Friendship:

• Both adamant that disagreement on Israel/Palestine shouldn't end the friendship.
• “Just because we don’t agree on everything politically doesn’t mean we can’t be friends...when you have friends you disagree with, you grow so much.” – Benjamin, [38:05]
• “There’s only very few specific political things that would make me say I can’t be friends with you.” – Albert, [39:08]

Breakthrough Moment:

• A tense but transformative train ride discussion led to greater tolerance and understanding:
  • “On the train, I think we mostly discussed the war in Gaza...couldn’t leave, made us discuss it fully,” – Benjamin, [57:37]
  • “It really got to me that I was creating a bad feeling for him for something I did...that is too stupid to actually personally affect my best friend in a negative way.” – Albert, [56:03]

Lessons Learned:

• Never fight by text: “Don’t fight on text – that is a really, really important observation.” – Freedland, [69:46]
• Mutual respect makes hard conversations sustainable.
• Bias awareness: Both acknowledge personal biases and ongoing effort to avoid them dominating.
• Empathy and Nuance: Both seek to “nuance” the other’s position rather than “win.”
• Value in "process talk:": Discuss not just the issue, but how the conversation is going.

Dr. Guralnik’s Praise:

• “I would like to suggest...that you bottle this. This attitude needs to be bottled and sent out into the world somehow.” [39:33]
• “They embody everything that we want the world to have – such respect for each other despite difference, deep friendship, trust...capacity to really examine themselves and learn from each other.” [68:46]

Generalized Guidance to Listeners:

• Don’t communicate only by text for major disagreements
• Allow for breaks; sometimes talk about something else
• Give the benefit of the doubt; “The purpose of the conversation is not to win, but to learn” – Guralnik, [74:17]
• Tend to the relationship as much as to the disagreement

Memorable Moments:

• Yonit: “Maybe I’m wrong, maybe you’re right...really is what you wish a conversation could look like.” [70:35]
• Dr. Guralnik: “Their attention to the relationship is part of how they sustain the conversation. How do we have the conversation is part of the conversation.” [71:07]

---

Section III: Chutzpah & Mensch Awards (75:25–83:43)

Chutzpah Candidates:

• Trump’s UK Jewish Refugee "Protection":
  Trump’s lawyer suggesting asylum for UK Jews—“not helpful” and alarmist, rooted in U.S. right-wing memes about the UK, says Freedland, [76:01].
• Jewish Prayer at the Temple Mount:
  Israel police permitting printed Jewish prayers at the al-Aqsa compound, a small change with potentially explosive consequences, tied to Ben Gvir’s influence, [76:53].
• Kamala Harris, Josh Shapiro, and Alleged Israeli "Agent" Question:
  Kamala Harris’s team allegedly asking Josh Shapiro if he was "an agent of the Israeli government" during vice-presidential vetting—labeled “beyond chutzpah” and “pretty shocking...a hoary old trope about Jews and their loyalties,” [79:55].

Mensch of the Week:

• Israeli Public Broadcaster (KAN):
  Yonit praises KAN for bringing the French intelligence drama Le Bureau (“Hasoknot”) to Israeli screens: “I will finally get to see this series...it’s a slightly strange Mensch Award this week.” [81:56]
• Jonathan’s endorsement: “You’ve got such a treat in store.” [82:47]

---

Section IV: Memorable Quotes & Takeaways

News Analysis

• “Trump’s Board of Peace is essentially a rival to the UN, except you have to pay to play.”
• “If you’re in the hands of Donald Trump, that is not a reliable place to be. Just ask Denmark.” – Freedland, [15:51]
• “The international order, the postwar order, is being removed and replaced, dismantled by Donald Trump.” [08:45]

Therapy & Dialogue

• “There’s always a multiplicity of positions and opinions when people interact...The purpose of an interaction is to expand our understanding, not to make people the same.” – Dr. Guralnik, [33:24]
• “Hold on to your perspective that the other person is a good person, even if they think differently.” – Dr. Guralnik, [72:49]
• “The purpose of the conversation is not to win, but to learn.” – Dr. Guralnik, [74:17]
• “Give me the benefit of the doubt.” – Freedland, reflecting on personal experience, [73:09]

---

Section V: Timestamps for Key Segments

| Timestamp | Segment Description | |-------------|-----------------------------------------------------| | 04:55–16:27 | Board of Peace at Davos / Implications for Israel | | 16:27–22:56 | Israeli political reactions and fact-checking | | 22:56–27:33 | Israeli political realignments and elections | | 28:58–34:58 | Introducing Listener Therapy with Dr. Guralnik | | 35:11–67:21 | Live therapy: Benjamin & Albert’s friendship | | 67:21–74:51 | Dr. Guralnik’s reflections / takeaways for listeners| | 75:25–84:08 | Chutzpah/Mensch Awards & wrap-up |

---

Tone and Style

• The discussion is fast-paced, witty, but nuanced—even in the midst of disagreement and dark news.
• Therapy segment is warm, encouraging, and emotionally candid, with hosts and guest openly discussing their own relationships and vulnerabilities.

---

Final Thoughts

This episode of Unholy pairs world-shaking news with the very human work of maintaining relationships in times of division. The Trump "Board of Peace" segment is incisive and filled with skepticism about grand designs and ulterior motives, while the therapy segment with Dr. Orna Guralnik offers rare hope and concrete advice for “doing disagreement” without destruction. Both threads paint a vivid portrait of this historical moment, from Israel’s political anxiety to the daily, personal work of bridge-building and good faith.

---

Recommended for:
Listeners seeking in-depth analysis of global politics, intimate perspectives on Jewish life after October 7th, and tangible advice for navigating difficult conversations in their own communities.

---

Transcript

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

I think the idea of separating out the very specific content that you might disagree on and the process that you're moving through to have the conversation is super important. That constant attention to the process while you're trying to sort through the complexity of the information and the facts and the possible solutions and the histories, the different histories involved, like attending to the process while you're doing that, is super important.

[Jonathan Friedland]

It's unholy. I'm Jonathan Friedland in London.

[Yanit Levy]

And I'm Yanit Levy in Tel Aviv. And you were hearing Dr. Orna Goranik in a conversation we will air later in this show, a really interesting conversation which we brought in Ona, who is a psychologist and a therapist. And she usually. She's famous, I think world famous for her show, Couples Therapy. We wanted her to talk to a pair of friends this. In that we were air in this episode that we're having difficulties over the Israel issue. And I think that's a. It's a fascinating conversation. We will listen to it later in the show.

[Jonathan Friedland]

It really is. And she's obviously an expert in resolving tensions between people, couples usually, but in. In our. In this case, as you say, a relationship between friends. And we have noticed, as we say, we've said before on the podcast, you know, lots of people going through this in the world we're in. And so we really brought that to it. We could obviously have a whole separate franchise of just sort of escape room therapy. We could call it Escape Room because so many people, you know, people come up to us and tell us how. How they use the podcast, but people telling us about the need just to get away somehow from the news because the news is so insane. I mean, this week, if you're in the news business this week, we'll get onto it. But it was just, you know, you needed to check yourself into a facility at the end of it because it is just loopy, isn't it? The world we're in?

[Yanit Levy]

It really is. I have to tell you that my escapism this week was to a show about a news anchor woman.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Oh, really?

[Yanit Levy]

Maybe not quite escapism when you think about it and what I do in my life, but it's actually a fantastic show. I know you haven't seen it yet, but I do recommend it. It's called the News Reader. It's an Australian show on Netflix, streaming on Netflix, about a anchorwoman of the evening news in Australia. It's 1986, so it is even more difficult for women to do that role. And what she goes through and you know that I have a slight, I don't know if to call it obsession but interest in the way that anchors are portrayed in popular culture. I'm usually also very insulted. I'm looking at you Will Ferrel when I say that I don't like them being ridiculed. I don't like the characters who are like the, you know, the William Hurt in Broadcast News who's like this superficial fake kind of character. Don't like those either. I will suffer through the Howard Beale, Peter Finch's genius role in Network Crazy Anchorman going even crazier. I'll suffer because it's a brilliant film. But this I thought was really very accurate. I mean obviously it's drama, there's a lot going on the emotionally as well, but it's just, it's, it's very. It takes news seriously, it takes the role seriously and I kind of like that.

[Jonathan Friedland]

So yeah, I think in this stakes I think you win on having your job being depicted on film way more often than mine. How many columnist movies are there? I don't, can't think of any. There are obviously journalists, investigative journalists.

[Yanit Levy]

Journalists and prints for sure, but writers.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Of opinionated columns who sit at their desk stroking their chin. Not so many. I think this is a deficit but God, as you list them, you're right, it's a whole genre from broadcast news through to.

[Yanit Levy]

Yeah, our producer Michal is yelling at you Sex and the City. So you want something sexier than calling this Carrie Bradshaw. I don't know what you want but I.

[Jonathan Friedland]

And I'm very, very similar to her in so many ways including in my working method almost. It's uncanny the parallels. Well, talking of two things. First you mentioned the newsreader is Australian. That gives me a chance to say that actually I know we have lots of listener there Australia. I will actually be in Australia and New Zealand doing a little bit of a speaking tour that's coming up in. Well in New Zealand in February and a bit in Australia, March maybe. We'll have details of that in our little show notes just so you can come along. It's not the full article.

[Yanit Levy]

Can we share what that means? Can we share what that means for our unholy listeners? Because last time Jonathan went on a three week vacation. There's a whole big war going on. So just saying I do in February. Write it down. Jonathan's going on another vacation.

[Jonathan Friedland]

I do worry about that. That is, don't think that's not on my mind because it has been. I do believe in those Sorts of weird coincidences, that's one thing. And the other thing, because we're talking about TV, is a reminder that we are, of course, on YouTube. And so you can see the podcast there as well as listen to it. Since I've now intrigued you with my references to Carrie Bradshaw and my wardrobe, you are obviously going to. Yeah, you're going to want to be watching on YouTube. She would definitely win that contest. Now, the news, as we've said, it's been crazy. If you are in, you know, where I am in Europe, the week began with the possibility of some kind of seizure, conquest, capture of the territory of a NATO ally, namely Greenland, by the United States, the biggest power in NATO. So mad that you almost didn't have the vocabulary for it. The idea that one NATO ally would seize the territory of another, as you and I record. I say that because who knows what's going to happen in the next minutes or hour because this changes. But Donald Trump has sort of walked that back. He's come down off the ledge and said there won't be a seizure by force, he said at Davos. And then a few hours later, he said, actually, I won't even do the promised threat of tariffs on countries that oppose me and some kind of deal is being worked up. So that was the, you know, massive news out of Davos, the gathering of world leaders and business leaders there and that Swiss mountain resort. But on Thursday, another big news event out of there, and that is the unveiling of the so called Board of Peace. And that was a big ceremony again at Davos. Apparently not exactly standing room only in that ceremony. There were a few empty seats, but a couple of things just to say about that. Before we go into how this might specifically affect the region, we focus on one, just superficial matters with Donald Trump. You know, he's somebody who's all about branding and everything. So I'm going to make no apologies for focusing for a moment on the logo of the new Board of Peace that was unveiled. You'll have seen it. It's these two sort of olive branches. It looks just like the UN logo with two key differences. Imagine the UN logo dipped in gold. And then imagine the map at the center of the UN logo showing basically America and the rest of the world slightly squeezed out. That's what's happened, you know, with Donald Trump. It's very often on the nose. It's very direct. So this is what he's telling us. The Board of Peace is essentially a rival to the UN except you have to pay to play, it's a billion dollars to be a permanent member and it's focused on the US and that reflects completely the way this body is going to work. Because the head of the border peace, the president of it, is one Donald Trump. Notice it's Donald Trump. It's not the President of the United States. In other words, even when he leaves office, he imagines himself still there and he says he will designate his successor. All of this is important because this body has morphed. Originally, it was understood to be a board of peace for Gaza. It was part of the deal that was cooked up last October, and that's how it was understood. But now we realize it's got much bigger ambitions. Its founding charter doesn't even mention Gaza by name, doesn't even mention it. As if to say, this is a new rival, alternative international body with Donald Trump at the apex of it. So all part of these signs that the international order, the post war order, is being removed and replaced, dismantled by Donald Trump. So that was the sort of big, you know, as I say, the sort of larger context for it. But of course, Gaza and Israel featured in this big ceremony.

[Yanit Levy]

Yes, he did say that the border peace will work in conjunction with the un. He also said that he ended eight wars. He didn't talk to the UN while doing it. This is from his speech, indeed, on Thursday. I think it's important to say that this, again, we know kind of the apparatus, it does seem cumbersome, right? There's going to be the sort of Board of Peace and then kind of beneath it or underneath it, the executive board. And that's like Marco Rubio and Witkoff and Kushner and Tony Blair. And then there's the office of the high representative, which is M. And then under that, the sort of, you know, another board for Gaza, it does seem quite a bureaucratic thing. We should mention that part of it will be representatives from Qatar, Turkey, Egypt. And the people who are supposed to run Gaza are technocrats, at least one of them. The person who will head it is a former deputy minister in the Palestinian Authority. At the end of the day, right, as an Israeli watching this, if this will all lead to the fact that Hamas will be disarmed and not no longer in control in Gaza, all the power to them. I'm just not entirely clear on how that will happen. Here is the worrying point. And I think that from the Israeli perspective, first of all, as I said, the Turkey and the Catal thing is worrying. Netanyahu stood in the Knesset. He said, I Promise there will not be any Turkish or Qatari soldiers in Gaza. That was never the discussion. The discussion is of members of much more higher ranking members in Qatar and Turkey. That is concerning for many Israelis, as I mentioned. And I think it's interesting that at the end of the day, Jonathan, the feeling here in Israel is a bit of an a, how shall I say it, sour taste. Right. Because what you thought after more than two years of war and after this terrible massacre that started the war, Hamas attacking Israel and after hundreds of soldiers killed in this war, to say nothing of many Palestinians in Gaza, what you thought was because the prime minister promised a total of victory. Now the interesting divide that is happening in this country is again between the sort of Netanyahu supporters or the right and the anti BB camp. The Netanyahu supporters are saying to the anti baby camp, this is what you get when you call for just end the war and bring back the hostages. This is what you get. And the anti baby camp is saying wait a minute, we said to you, you have no strategy. We said to you you have to bring in a Palestinian Authority into Gaza to have something to, to replace Hamas. So just to give you this sort of music of things here, we're, we're divided on so many things also on this sort of board of, of peace issue as well.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Yeah, I think there's lots in there that would unsettle even the pro Bibi view, pro Netanyahu camp. So for just one thing, but a bit of news because Donald Trump always likes when he has a ceremony like this to just, you know, a sort of symbol. And so he had the, the technocrats that they've designated announced that the Rafa border crossing is going to open soon. That was the crossing that was obviously from the Egyptian to Israel. For a long time it was the only one that was open. But then Israel were on the Gaza side of it. They got that territory and said it was going to close and remain closed basically until the last hostage was returned, including the last deceased hostage. Now that's right. Now in effect that has been overruled because under this Trump board of peace, it's going to open. Now it's not the, that you know, that's obviously good news for people there but, but it's just symbolic of the idea that Netanyahu is not always going to get his own way in this arrangement. So those people who are worried about the presence of Qataris and the Turks have got grounds there, I think. Look, I would say there's a few things to be Concerned about anyway, about how serious these people are about peace and about a job like this. You've mentioned the bureaucratic structure, which is interesting because you'd have thought the business might mindset would be let's cut through all the UN bureaucracy and not set up lots of multiple agencies. They would just have a, a sort of chief executive running it. So that's also interesting. I think my point about seriousness is Jared Kushner, who was there in Davos announcing it, saying, let's plan for catastrophic success. Ho Ho says, you know, he's. One of the things he's discovered is peace is a different deal than a business deal. At which point my inner Aaron Sorkin was going to, you think, you know, like that's, that's, that's a revelation. He goes, he goes on, because you're changing a mindset. I did feel all of the TV references are coming here, but I did feel that sort of Logan Roy thought, these are not serious people. If you're saying that about something like this, that you're discovering anew that this is not, this is not just a business deal. Nevertheless, Donald Trump was back talking about his beautiful property, oceanfront property. They had a projection on the screen showing it looking like Dubai. Something about this just doesn't make inspire confidence to me because it seems fantastical. They saying it will cost $25 billion to rebuild Gaza. No word on who exactly is going to pay that. It seems to me a huge underestimate. If the Federal Reserve building in Washington D.C. cost 2.5 billion to refurbish, I somehow think 25 billion is an undercount. But the reason why I think Israelis or Israelis associated with Netanyahu should be worried. First of all, look at this membership, the people who were there on stage. It's a kind of dictator's club. Viktor Orban there. You mentioned the various Middle east states, Bahrain, Morocco. You've got invitations out to Belarus. Putin's got an invitation. This. At first glance, there will be some people who think, great. The UN has been so terrible for Israel. We know that they'll say from UNRUA and the of a UN Human Rights Council, great, let's sweep that away and replace it with this. This will be marvellous. But the problem from Israel's own point of view should be that when you're in the hands, you know, I can get why they didn't love it with the un, but if you're in the hands of Donald Trump, that is not a reliable place to be. Just ask Denmark. You can think You're a great ally of Donald Trump's, but he can turn on a dime if it suits him and Israel is suddenly in his hands if the way things are going. And my point about the dictators club is in there are those Middle Eastern, those Arab, those Gulf states that Donald Trump listens to most. They are the people who he does deals with. They can bring him great lucrative deals. And if they say here's what we need and it could be a Palestinian state, they may insist on that. Their street may be demanding it. I think Donald Trump listens to that that more than he'll listen to Netanyahu. So that's why I'm saying from Netanyahu's own point of view, be careful what you wish for here. You may hate the UN but you may not love the new Trump UN that seems to be coming in its place.

[Yanit Levy]

Yeah, I would say a few things here. By the way, the most Trumpian of all lines, I think that was said in this event. It was on Wednesday in his speech he said I told Bibi stop taking credit for the Iron Dome. That's our technology. Which just in parentheses don't want to fact check the president don't want to be the recipient of the chutzpah word this episode. No, it's not. It's Iron Dome. Is Israeli developed. There were some issues with American funding, by the way, if I'm not mistaken was Barack Obama as president who asked Congress to fund Iron Dome. George Bush before his predecessor didn't think that the system was developed enough. Contrary to other systems in missile defense like David's sling and the arrow which are developed by America, the US And Israel together. The Iron Dome actually is Israel developed. But is the hardware my patriotic moment there?

[Jonathan Friedland]

No. But on the fact check is the hardware the missiles themselves, they come from America.

[Yanit Levy]

Well, it is an Israeli development. The sum of the funding is indeed US Development. But all of that, the rest is is but just to say it's interesting because it shows sheds a light on the who gets the credit. That is the important point of this. Look, I would say two things about Americans involvement and just to sort of zoom out for a moment and give us remind us the perspective that the American administration was in this from October 8, 2023. It was a different administration with the Biden administration. Remember Secretary of State then Blinken was part of the Israeli cabinet. He was sitting in these meetings the first days of right after the shock of October 7th. The then defense Minister Yoav Gallant was sharing the plans, the Israeli plans with The Americans, it was a different time because again, there was more daylight between the Biden administration and the Israeli one. But Netanyahu brought the Americans in very, very unprecedentedly from the very beginning. After this terrible shock of October 7th, now he has even less leverage to tell Trump what to do. I think it's also important that his to remind us all his eyes are on the ball of the elections. This is an election year. And as long as Donald Trump gives him what he needs, which is support in every possible way in an election, I think he's okay. He'll be okay with the rest. You're talking about other concerns and there definitely are in the security echelon in Israel. But from the Netanyahu perspective, I think thus far he's getting what he, what he wants and what he needs.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Just what if as a hypothetical what if before elections the those Gulf states in particular say we have to have language on Palestinian statehood, we have to and we need it now. Donald Trump listens to those people. What if he then puts that squeeze on Netanyahu? That won't help him electorally, would it?

[Yanit Levy]

I would say carefully that if you are a die hard Netanyahu fan, all of this is priced in right? Remember Netanyahu for a very long time explaining to the Israeli people why he can't go for a Gaza deal, why you can't release all of the hostages in one day. And then it was very interesting to see his supporters turn around that, that claim and say why. Actually it is a genius move of him to do that. So I don't think that will for his base change fundamentally his situation going towards elections.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Okay, but there's always those voters who are not his base who may think the point of Netanyahu is to stand between us and a Palestinian state. And if he is forced to fold, look, I agree that's a distant prospect, it's not imminent. And maybe even Trump would accommodate Netanyahu and make sure nothing like that happened until the other side of an election. I could see all that happening. My only point really is Donald Trump is transactional. And when he is transactional, he gives to those people who can profit him the most. And he looks at those Gulf states and those trillion dollar deals in Saudi Arabia and thinks, those guys give me something. Netanyahu gives me a headache. And I think that's why this new world order that's taking shape isn't all great news. For those people who've long hated the UN they, this might be not as comfortable as they anticipate.

[Yanit Levy]

I think you're very right to see all this through the prism of business deals, including what is happening in Gaza and the whole sort of setup of this Board of Peace. I would mention, I, I would mention our conversation with Amos Hochstein. Obviously not objective when it comes to Trump, one of Biden's closest advisors. But what he said to us, remember, he said, look, the only thing that at the end of the day could stop Trump, it's not going to be Europe, but it is going to be a Congress if the Democrats do take over the House of Representatives in November. Because what you saw in the first Trump tenure, you know, you had the responsible adults in the room, you had the gym Mattis, you had the Mark Esper who said to Trump, you, sir, you can't bomb Mexico just because you feel like it. You even had the Mike Pence. You don't have that. Now, some of the people surrounding the President seem to be even more gung ho than he is. So that is, you know, when you ask yourself a general question, not only when it pertains to Israel, the general question, I think the answer would be, we're probably looking for November.

[Jonathan Friedland]

I was just going to say something before we leave this Donald Trump has been saying he solved eight wars. He did say again in Davos, I have brought peace to the Middle East. You know, that's news to a lot of people because it doesn't look like there's a peacefully in the Middle east, including in Gaza. It suits everyone to say it's all over, it's been sorted, it's done and dusted and was in October. But there are others who are saying this is a kind of ceasefire in name only in the sense there is action going on all the time. Just this week, hospitals in Gaza, they're the source. But they said Israeli forces killed just on Wednesday. Rather take one day that 11 Palestinians were killed, including two 13 year old boys and three journalists. And the journalists have been named who? And the Palestinian Journalist syndicate said that they were on their way to film and document a refugee camp. The point being that this has, you know, it suits Donald Trump, it suits Netanyahu, it suits, in a way even, you know, Hamas. For everyone to act as if this is done, it isn't quite done and this is still ongoing. And the, that means that the work of the border peace, the actual practical work is that, you know, they have their work cut out. This is a live situation, not one that has been resolved and tied up with the bow.

[Yanit Levy]

Yes, I'm just thinking of what you said about the sort of these are not serious people. I do think that people like Nikolai Miladnow is a serious person. He has a lot of experience in being sort of envoy and I think Tony Blair is a serious person. By the way, you know Kushner and Witkoff did get a deal that at the end of the day brought home 20 hostages. So I mean I would love to give them the benefit of the doubt again as I says and Israeli the thing I'm looking for is one, one make sure Hamas is not in power and make sure they don't have any power to do this. Again I'm very clear and I think most Israel's are pretty realistic. You're not going to get at the last semi automatic rifle from the last Hamas terrorist. That is not going to happen. But you need a different power in Gaza. In the meantime, the Iranian thing is not off the table. Although Trump did say on Thursday, you know Iran wants to talk, we'll talk. But again from the definition of the Israeli security echelon they are Israel is very much gearing up for an option that Trump will attack Iran. We know that was sort of perhaps the plan about a week ago and that was stopped in its tracks for all kinds of reasons. A lot of pressure put on the American president not to go for it then I think Khamenei made a mistake to insult the president directly which probably brought it slightly back to the table. And the sort of modus operandi here in Israel is still to be very prepared for the United States States attacking Iran in whatever capacity that will happen and for a response to be of Iran attacking Israel. Elections are upon us pretty soon in Israel at least this year. I wouldn't put my bet on are we talking about June or September? I can go into the timing if you'd like. But I would just talk about a few developments that we have seen more interestingly on the sort of in the anti Bibi camp. Because in the Bibi camp it's pretty clear what is going on, right? The leader of that camp is still Netanyahu. On the other side you have a lot of different parties and what we saw is first of all Guy, the Azenkot former chief of staff of the Israeli military who used to run with Benny Gantz, another former chief of staff is now running on his own. What he wants is this big party that will put together. Bennett from the right was of course a prime minister between 2021 and 2022 and then put together also yay Rapid from the left Also prime minister right after Bennett for four months. And that will be the sort of big party that will run against Netanyahu. Leaving out, you may have noticed, two parties. One of them on the left, the Democrats, what was the Labor Party with the Golan. And on the right, Victor Lieberman. That was his suggestion. Neither Bennett or Lapid picked that up. What he just what he mentioned as a, you know, as a way to decide who will be the leader of that party. Polls, but neither picked it up. It is a very big story what is happening in the Israeli sort of anti Netanyahu camp. A lot of people are wondering whether the better idea would be to run separately in five different parties or to run at least with some sort of unity in that group. Whether it better to decide now or to decide closer to election. A lot of questions. In the meantime, Benny Gantz, who you can always trust him for being the person who will save Netanyahu at the very last minute, already said that he will be the person who save Netanyahu. Declaring that pretty officially and clearly and coming out with a campaign that upset many in the Israeli left, saying, I'm not going to be with. I'm not going to sit with Benir, the extreme right, and I'm not going to sit with the United Arab List, which is Ram. Many people sort of got very upset at that comparison. But that is his slogan. When we have this discussion, I always remind you of the Israeli math, the Israeli politics math. You're trying to find the sort of soft right, those 10 seats, seats between that are really thinking, do they want to go with Netanyahu, do they want to go with Bennett? He's trying to pick from that tree and say, if I even get, you know, seven seats this time, that's enough for me.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Is his calculus that the thing about saving Netanyahu, that he thinks there are voters who would quite like to see Netanyahu come back, but without Ben GVIR and think Gantz is the way to get that, that I will get Netanyahu as prime minister, but without such a far right coalition.

[Yanit Levy]

That's exactly what he's betting on. That there are people who say to themselves, I don't want this extreme government, I want unity in this country. By the way, if you ask people, would you like this kind of unity government, a lot of people would say yes. So he's ca. He's. There's just not enough people who would vote for Benny Gantz because he's still, still under the electoral threshold in the polls. So he's Counting on those people. Exactly. The people who will say, I'm okay with Netanyahu being prime Minister. I just don't want this extreme, extreme government that we've seen for the last almost four years.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Yeah. The other scenario I had some people talking about this week in opposition political types was the scenario whereby, and this eisencot structure would be conducive to this, whereby you get this kind of umbrella, anti BB bloc, they do cohere as one bloc rather than as lots of little parties. Therefore, they get asked, this is the theory, they get asked first by the president to have a go at forming a coalition because they emerge as the largest single party. And in that situation, they talk to Likud and say, Likud can come into this national unity government without Netanyahu. It's a, you know, fantasy upon a fantasy. But it just goes to this idea of why there might be a case for them running as one big mega block, because then you get first bite of the cherry. That was one argument I heard. I do think it's interesting that the opposition forces for Netanyahu are in, you could say, if you were being unkind, disarray, arguing with each other about how many. Who's the leader? Small party, big party, Netanyahu. That's a huge advantage to him. The coherence of his offer, his block, Likud, him as leader, unambiguous clarity. Whereas the others are all lots of little people running around, rats in a sack sort of thing. It really plays to him. It's a big, big advantage to.

[Yanit Levy]

Little did we all know that October 6, 2023, was for everyone in Israel and the Diaspora, the last day of our former lives. Everything feels different since the events during those 827 days shook up and even broke up relationships inside families and between friends. And so many listeners have approached us and written to us with those difficulties.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Difficulties.

[Yanit Levy]

We have tried in our own way to help with that, hoping that our podcast would, through weekly conversations between Israel and Diaspora, between two friends who don't always see eye to eye, reflect those difficulties and somehow help ease some of the disagreements. But sometimes extra help is needed, and we turn to an expert and try something somewhat experimental in a podcast. We'll call it Listeners Therapy. Four of our listeners, a couple and a couple of friends, will talk to us about their differences, but not only to us, because here comes to save the day, Dr. Orna Goralnik. She's a clinical psychologist and psychoanalyst. She teaches at nyu, and she is at the center of Showtime's documentary series, Couples Therapy. Orna, we're really so honored to have you on Unholy for this very special conversation.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

I'm very excited. Thank you for inviting me.

[Jonathan Friedland]

And Orna, what Yonit was talking about there, we have certainly been hearing it through this podcast, exactly as Yonit says. Listeners telling us, people all but stopping us in the street saying, my brother, my daughter, my wife, we're not talking because of his or whatever. To what extent are you coming across this either in your own life or even. I'm particularly interested in your professional life, are you hearing these post? October 7th strains yourself everywhere?

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Everywhere, every day with everyone. I'm hearing it both in my practice, my patients, describing their difficulties and conflicts with people they're close to. In my practice, my patients and I have been in all sorts of difficult situations in response to October 7th all along. And then my friends, my family, like everyone I know, I mean, it's. The world has been kind of seized by this focal conflict.

[Yanit Levy]

It's interesting that I remember when hearing you and talking about, you know, couples therapy and so many things that you said about how you approach that kind of conversation. You said not being judgmental, but being curious and having this active listening, not trying, telling the couples, not trying to win the argument. It really felt to me like you were talking at some points about Jonathan and me, but also about that kind of conversation happening inside the Jewish world between Israel and diaspora, even beyond, like friends of Israel, people trying to figure out their views. As you say, it kind of is. It became the focal point for everything. It just upended our lives in so many ways.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Yeah, I certainly would not limit it to Israelis or Jews. I mean, I've had very complicated situations with people that supposedly have nothing to do with the area that.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Yeah, well, in fact, we're going to bring that out in. In. In one of the conversations. We're going to draw you in on, bring you in on exactly the relationship between Jews, non Jews. It's all part of this landscape. Before we introduce our first pair of people to the conversation, I'm just so interested in something about your own method and the approach that you. You know, we've been talking about this before. The conversation we're having now that you've advised for how we do this and what you bring to it just generally from your work. I mean, what is just so that listeners know how we're going to play this, Yonit and I are going to begin the conversation, but just say something about how you're conceiving this all I.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Feel like what I've learned over the years of working with patients, and particularly with couples, I've developed a certain approach to how people negotiate difference. What's like a helpful way to negotiate difference, Difference, which is always there when you put two people together. I mean, it's actually there inside us. It's not only between us. We have inner conflict. I mean, what happened after October 7th has pushed me to a certain kind of limit in terms of trying to rethink certain paradigms. But I would say generally the paradigm is we have to understand that there's always like a multiplicity of positions and opinions when people interact. Because people come to every situation with their own history. And their history is not just their personal history. It's not just their relationship with their close ones, but the communities they identify with, the histories that they've read, the movies that they've seen, and then the intergenerational stories that have been passed down to them. So each person comes from a very deeply rooted position when they understand what's in front of them and they're not going to be the same. And the purpose of an interaction is not to make them same. The purpose of an interaction is to expand our understanding and to really broaden how we understand the world around us and bring us a little closer to reality. So that's how I see the purpose of interaction. And there are many implications to that. Then people learn how to both. They can calm themselves down, they can learn more about the world, but they can also have more compassion towards what is other than them.

[Jonathan Friedland]

I think we should give this a go and welcome our first pair of people to this, as Jonit says, this experiment in listeners therapy.

[Yanit Levy]

So we want to go to Copenhagen and talk to two friends, Albert and Benjamin. So could you to set us up, up, maybe tell us about the basic differences between you in relation to, like, Israel and the Jewish world.

[Benjamin]

Benjamin, you guys, I just turned 19 this Friday. Congratulations.

[Yanit Levy]

Happy birthday.

[Benjamin]

My dad is half Israeli because his dad was from Jerusalem. I'm not halachically Jewish because my mom isn't Jewish, but identify with my Jewish side and practice some Jewish traditions. I go to shul once in a while and I enjoy it. And then I see myself as just fighting for the Jewish people, being able to freely practice their Judaism and practice it in whatever way they see fit.

[Albert]

My name is Albert. I go to the same school as Benjamin, the same high school. I'm 18 years old, and for me, my grandpa is Jewish. He died in like 1999 or something so I never knew him and my dad actually didn't grow up with him, but he always knew that he had Jewish family. I have some family far out that lives in Israel and USA and are Jewish, so. But I never had any contact with them. And I never been to a synagogue, for example.

[Benjamin]

Yeah. So we met up at the school we both attend and pretty early on into our relationship we started discussing Israel and what the proper way to view the situation is. And I think the major disagreements are about Israeli presence in the west bank and maybe something to do with the creation of Israel. That's probably our main kind of disagreements.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Talk us through the crux of the disagreement between you.

[Albert]

Well, the times where the conversation has been heated the most have been when we talked about the occupation of the west bank and how the idf, the Israel military, is treating the Palestinian people.

[Benjamin]

When we discuss the west bank, sometimes I think Albert kind of looks at the result, at the current situation, what it's like being a Palestinian in the West Bank. And I'm more like, I have a different view where I look at why the Israelis are there. And I focus a lot on intention, where I think you focus more on consequences. What are the consequences of the war in Gaza?

[Albert]

And yeah, that's a major one, actually.

[Benjamin]

That's a major one. I focus a lot on intention. Like, what's the intention of Israelis? And you focus more on like, yeah, what's the result?

[Albert]

Yeah, what's actually happening?

[Yanit Levy]

Yeah, I really want us to go into the sort of as. As Jonathan said, the crux of the argument. But you're friends and I'm interested in. In that. Just that wanting to stay friends. Because there are cases in which people are like, you know what? We can't agree on this. Forget it. Let's just not be friends.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Friends.

[Yanit Levy]

I'm interested in you wanting to stay friends and yet to continue to disagree on this.

[Benjamin]

I think a lot of what's going on in our culture is that politics might be playing too big of a role. Politics are definitely important and it kind of shows you the way that you're looking at the world. But I think friendship is much more than your view on Israel and Palestine and the conflict. And I think we both understand that. And like, like Albert has so many lovely characteristics. So just the fact that we don't just, like, agree. Just the fact that we, like, don't agree on everything politically doesn't mean that we can't be friends and help each other in like, like personal ways. And also just when you have friends that you disagree with. You grow so much. My, like, whole view of the conflict and also on a lot of. Lot of other topics. I've learned a lot by talking with someone who doesn't have the same view. And I think it's actually very bad that we have a trend where people who don't agree politically can't stay friends. So I think it's just. It's part of my values that I want to have friends whom I don't agree with on everything.

[Albert]

I would say that there's only very few specific political things that would make me say I can't be friends with you. I can't stand up for you as a person and have a relationship with you or a relation to someone. So, yeah, I totally agree on what Benjamin just said. And I also grow extremely much from talking to Benjamin and other people I do not agree with.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

I would like to suggest, Yanita and Jonathan, that you bottle this. I mean, this attitude, this needs to be bottled and sent out into the world somehow.

[Albert]

Wow.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Can I ask something? Can you say something about your friendship before we get into the politics? Like what, what. What bonds the two of you? What do you appreciate about each other?

[Albert]

I never have a boring conversation with Benjamin, I would say. And it doesn't matter where it is. If it's for lunch at school or at a bar on a Friday or, yeah, whatever. If we dinner together, anything. I'm never bored when I'm. When I'm talking to Bedjun. Yeah.

[Benjamin]

I think one of the things that, like, bonds me to Albert is there's a Danish word called radford sense, which is like a sense of justice. And I think it's like a really strong principle in Albert, which just makes you view situations in a different light than most people where you really want to stand up for, like, what's just. And that's kind of an incredible value. And that bonds me at least.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Wow. Do you feel the same way, Albert, about Benjamin?

[Albert]

I feel he has great values. If I shouldn't say just the same as you just said about me, I would say that Benjamin is one of the smartest people I've ever met. Totally. And also way faster than me in his way of thinking. He has said so much inspiring and helping stuff to me in personal ways, in, in political ways, in. In. In terms of like, just. Just thinking about, like, life and, and values and, and religion and stuff. That was what I meant when I said I'm never bored when I'm talking to Benjamin. Yeah. Just because how his brain works is.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

There A Quantum change since October 7th.

[Benjamin]

Totally. I never really identified with being Jewish at all until October 7th. I celebrated the different holidays, but I never attended synagogue. I didn't think that much about Israel. I had been once. And everything changed when October 7th happened. I felt like a strong connection and I was drawn and everything sprung from that moment.

[Albert]

I wouldn't actually say that I started to think about it more after the October 7th. I was. I was. I was always interested in it before also. And I. The October 7th happened after I graduated from public school. I'd always been confronted with it before, so it was. It was not a major difference, but of course it. It became a cultural issue, a topic to talk about. Just like when Russia invaded Ukraine or something. You know, it's a major thing. And of course, most people have an opinion and are interested in talking about it. So maybe some discussions, some more discussions happened after.

[Jonathan Friedland]

And in terms of your own relationship, at what point did you notice this was becoming a thing between you, and how did that manifest itself?

[Benjamin]

I think we just started talking about it immediately. And when we, like, understood that we disagreed, I just wanted to know, how do we disagree? And I think I was more. I was never an extremist, but I think I had more, like, particular views, so I couldn't understand how could he say stuff like this. And I had, like, maybe a wrong understanding of history. So I made some, like, not completely correct assumptions. And I think Albert kind of corrected me on them. And then I just started getting.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Can you give a few examples? Yeah.

[Benjamin]

It's about the nakba of the Palestinian expulsion, where I kind of felt that many of them left themselves, maybe on Arab leaders call. And I put it up against the expulsion of all the Jews from the Middle east and was like, yeah, shit happens. And I didn't really feel it was planned. And that's where we had our major first disagreement, which is still a disagreement. Like what really happened in. In the creation of Israel and what strategies can we kind of give, like, an intentful, like, intention. What acts were intended and what acts were just part of a bloody war. And. And that's something we still discuss.

[Albert]

Yeah, and. And the. The most frustrating thing about that is we will never know for sure because there is so many sources and so many experts saying different things on what happened. So in the end, you need to kind of pick and choose who you want to believe and what you feel like seems most realistic compared to what also happened, for example, that we know happened. So.

[Benjamin]

Yeah, yeah, that's, that's.

[Albert]

I just Think it's frustrating that we will discuss this forever because that we will never be 100% sure.

[Jonathan Friedland]

I'm interested. When you speak about this, about Israel or the Jewish people, is the conversation, this is what we are doing wrong or right? Or is it. This is what they are doing wrong or right? How do you both talk about it? And does it matter to the other one whether the person you're speaking with says this as a we or a you?

[Benjamin]

Yeah, I feel very identified with Israel. And when they do stuff, I sometimes use the plural pronoun we. I don't think you do that. And for me, it's really not a problem if Albert says, how can they do that? That's not a problem for me at all. It's not like just because you have Jewish roots, you need to have some kind of identification with Israel. I don't know how you think about me using the.

[Albert]

Well, honestly, I do not remember you talking about Israel saying we. Are you sure you've done that?

[Benjamin]

When I at least talk with my. I might not do it when we talk, but a lot of times when I talk with my dad's family, we always talk about Israel being like. Like, we're really connected to Israel and that it's. Of course, I'm not an Israeli citizen, and I always try and say that I can't understand what Israelis might be going through this and that, but I definitely feel connected to Israel. And if Israel does something terrible or if something happens to Israel, which is terrible, I feel like a tremendous sense of sympathy or like, how could they do this, which I don't. With any other nation, like, other than Denmark, of course. So.

[Albert]

Yeah, well, I think I wouldn't decide for you how you need to pronounce different countries, but I would have a hard time understanding. I do have a hard time understanding that you have such a big connection to a country you've been to twice, you know, and also because you're not extremely religious, it's not because that. That you're like, oh, but the temple is there in Jerusalem. And I just have a hard time understanding that. And for me, I don't identify at all with the Danish government all the time either. I wouldn't say we. If I talk about something the Danish government is. Is going to do. So I. I definitely wouldn't do it to. With. With Spain that I've also been to twice, I think.

[Benjamin]

Yeah, but. But I wouldn't have a problem if you did. So I think I might do it because I feel that Israel is such an important part of being Jewish, at least for me. I think a lot of non religious Jews, or at least not like very religious Jews, kind of have Israel to bind them together. And I sense that without Israel, the Jewish people would be just. We would be ruthless still. And with the anti Semitism rising, I think it's such an important thing to, to kind of, it's, it's what gives us agency on the world stage. I think it was Norm Weisman who said it, which is like in the early days it was a wish for Jews to again have a. Have a say as Jews on the world stage. I think it's a place where we can express ourselves and not always be part of something else. And that's why I think Israel is so important for Jews. And I think that's why I have a connection with them. But I sense, I also understand if someone wouldn't have a connection to Israel. Like, yeah, I totally understand that too. But for me, I think it's part of my Judaism and I feel very connected to Israel.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Does that bother you, Albert, to hear Benjamin say that?

[Albert]

Oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no, it does not bother me. It's. Well, it's, it's fine. And I understand that you also, you have living family there that you could go visit, for example. And of course that, that I understand if that gives you a connection. But for me, I feel like it is also important to separate Judaism and Zionism and Israel, Israeli people and Jewish people, because it is not the same thing and it is not all Jews. That, that as you also said, I'm just repeating that. Have any connection with Israel. Yeah. For me, I don't have any feelings. I know that my grandpa is buried there, but I never met him. And I want to go visit, of course, but. Yeah, no, but the answer is no to if it bother me that Benjamin has a different relationship with Israel.

[Benjamin]

I think when you go to Israel that kind of changes. And I'm not saying that that like.

[Albert]

Because you haven't been.

[Benjamin]

You don't understand it. But when I was in Israel, I was, I was there in the fall and I've just never experienced that feeling. It's incredible. You can walk around with your magentavit and just. You're just not thinking about it at all. It's so nice when I walk around Copenhagen with the magenta vit. I don't know what people are thinking, but what they might be thinking is that's a Jew or he's Jewish and in Israel I can wear my magen David. And it doesn't matter as much. I'm not seen as a Jew because so many people are Jewish. I'm just me. Whereas in Denmark, in my class, in my school, there's always this thing that differentiates me from a lot of other people because he's Jewish. And it's not a bad thing being Jewish, but it still differentiates you from most people. Whereas in Israel it can be a.

[Albert]

Little bit of a big thing, maybe.

[Benjamin]

Exactly. And it can be quite intimidating walking around with your Magen David. Whereas in Israel I can be Jewish in the way that I am, and people don't really think about it that much. It's just. It's the water that we swim in. And that's one of the things that's like, people just don't understand it if they aren't practicing Judaism and have visited Israel because it's such a unique experience.

[Albert]

And yeah, that's at least a major difference in the identity. Because I never walk around with the kippah or with anything Jewish people don't. People can't see it on me that I'm Jewish.

[Benjamin]

No.

[Albert]

Like with Jews sometimes. Yeah.

[Benjamin]

So they wouldn't be able to if I didn't wear any Jewish markers. Like, my dad looks totally different from me. I've gotten my mom's jeans. But of course people can see it if I'm wearing a necklace.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Benjamin, are you aware of how your mind wants to hold on to certain explanations and wants to reject others?

[Benjamin]

I know that I have some kind of cognitive. I don't remember the term cognitive bias. Yeah, exactly. I know that I have cognitive bias.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

You feel it?

[Benjamin]

I feel it. I want Israel to be a good state. And I also feel that they are. And I don't know if. If that's because of my cognitive bias or if they actually are. I feel I know some facts that kind of dismantles the view that Israel is like a super immoral state. But I don't know whether that's because I'm informed or if it's because I'm biased. So, yeah, everybody is biased. And we can only discuss from a place of bias. And that's why it's so important to discuss with people who doesn't have the same biases.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

And you, Albert, how do you feel about this?

[Albert]

If I would be scared of something, I would just be scared that if. If I am taking like a really morally wrong stance on something, if I'm. If I'm defending something violent, for example, if I'm defending something, people Committing violence because I think it can be justified sometimes I, I can be scared of, of that being really morally wrong. Wrong. I would actually say I don't have a great bias at least because I don't have a, I don't have a connection to any of the countries. And what I think so many people our age is doing is they have a bias because they want to be, be pro Palestine alone because that's what, what everybody else is. And that's kind of the right stains to have. And there they have almost no information and have never researched anything because that is just the right stains to take right now. And I wouldn't say that I'm a part of that either. So I don't know. Of course, like it would also be, be weird if I didn't have a bias, but I can't really explain where it should come from if I have it. But maybe you have a.

[Benjamin]

I think Albert has a bias towards justice and I think you view the situation from like you're just looking at the facts and of course they're run through by some sort of interpretive structure. But I, I, I, I understand when you say that you don't feel you have the same bias as I do because you don't really feel connected to either side. But that doesn't, I just want to say that doesn't rule my perspective out. You know, it's not like just because you have some sort of connection, you can't talk about the subject.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Does the conversation between the two of you, let's say about the west bank, does it ever break down like you can't talk because either because you've reached a wall or you're too upset or you're mad at each other?

[Benjamin]

I think actually we got through that on our trip. We both went to Italy and on the train from, I think it was the place we were in Desenzano to Milan, we had like an hour long conversation and we couldn't kind of leave.

[Albert]

Because we were in the train.

[Benjamin]

And that's, I think that was a moment where we kind of got past the chickening out and being like, yeah, well the break is over, let's go to class. And ever since that I don't really feel when we've discussed that we've hit a wall where it's like, I can't do this anymore.

[Albert]

But yeah, I would also say that, that, yeah, yeah, I totally remember that conversation and it changed something. But another thing that also changed was we started to text less about this and only having the conversation in real life, because I feel like sometimes I.

[Benjamin]

Am.

[Albert]

I'm, I'm both misunderstanding something, you could say, but I also feel like my words can be misunderstood into being worse than what they are when we text. So. No, no, no, we, we don't hit a wall if we. Sometimes you just also want to talk about something else. So if we have like a whole day together, we maybe talk about this for max an hour, and then the conversation naturally will turn to something else.

[Benjamin]

Yeah, yeah.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

What, what happened on that train ride. Describe what each of you went through.

[Benjamin]

True.

[Albert]

He told me that he. Yeah, yeah, yeah. He told me that he felt like it was really bad behavior for me as a friend to get to be personally mad at him for something he was. For, for some of his opinions. And that got to me that I was actually creating a, A, a bad feeling for him for something I did. And, and, and made me start to think about more of how I express something also when I'm in my feelings about. Yeah, this topic.

[Benjamin]

And, and that's the thing I also think we should talk about because sometimes you get bogged down on the discussion itself. But I think also just for, for the listeners, if you ever have a discussion with a friend you don't agree with, with, try also having a discussion about how you discuss. Because, yeah, that can lead to some pretty good places. And on the train, I think we mostly. Just to. Yeah, we mostly discussed the war in Gaza and how it. I think I said something along the lines of the IDF being a pretty moral army in like, in perspective to a lot of other wars. And we just discussed that thoroughly. And I think the fact that we couldn't leave kind of made us discuss it fully, which was pretty cool. And when we got off the train.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

How did you get through it? Tell us about how you did it.

[Benjamin]

We just referenced all the facts we know, you know, just talked about. Albert said something, you know, have you seen how many buildings have been destroyed? And I said something like, yeah, but imagine how many. I would say something along. Like, if that many bombs have been dropped and like fewer people have died, that must mean that they somehow take into consideration where they bomb. And then he reacts and, you know, I don't want to tell the whole story again, but yeah, we just.

[Albert]

I also maybe do not, because it's, it's, it's maybe like four months ago or something. So, so I, I don't remember the exact details, but I just, I can repeat the thing that, that, that it, it really got to me that I was actually Doing something very not nice towards him or creating something very not nice of a feeling for you because of how I could sometimes talk to you when I was in my feelings about something we discussed. And, and, and I just realized that that is too stupid to, to actually personally affecting my best friend in a negative way. I really don't understand how you can, how you can be this person in all of our personal life and in other conflicts, and then you just, you have this stain in this. And then I'll try to connect it to. Maybe it's because of the bias and the connection you have that you don't see this from the same outside perspective as me, I think I can say. But yeah, it has also been a feeling of, of just really not understanding how this person with these values can have this opinion.

[Benjamin]

Yeah.

[Albert]

And how, how that made any sense.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

It totally made sense. But how do you work on it between the two of you? How do you talk about it? Albert, if you say that to Benjamin, what happens?

[Benjamin]

I think it's also because when we just started out talking in our relationship, I didn't articulate my opinions correctly. And I think that made you think, how the hell is he thinking that? Yes, but just more conversation. I think that's the way to go. Don't stop. Yeah, just keep talking. Because I don't think you feel.

[Albert]

And also if it's, if it's, if it's hard and it sometimes makes you tired or you just want to, to, to stop and can, can we just talk about something else? That sometimes you can do that, but, but it should definitely not be all the time. You. Yeah, it's, it's, it's the best thing to have the hard conversations.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Yeah, but you're offering something to each other to make it possible.

[Benjamin]

I think I know, just as you said, that Albert would not. He doesn't hate, like.

[Albert]

Yeah.

[Benjamin]

Your opinion doesn't stem from hate. And I know that when you speak, you speak from a place of, like, goodwill. And that kind of makes me able to take into consideration what you're saying. I don't know what you think about that, actually. Do you think when I'm talking about Israel, do you think I have like, holy shit, I'm talking to the most biased guy in the world?

[Albert]

No, no, no, no, no, no, not at all. I would actually, if I should start with something positive, I know that I'm speaking to a person who is really, really, really well informed and curious and. Yeah. Just know a lot of things about. You know a lot of things about a Lot of different things, but especially on, on, on this topic. Yeah, so, so that is a strong factor that makes me really listen to what you say because I know that, that, that you have a lot of facts, rights, and then also that I can, I can identify with all your other moral values and that I know that you are of course a, A great person, a good person. So yeah, if it would be harder to talk to someone who was saying that. No, no, that, that some of them doesn't have the right to exist or something thing where I can just. I, I just know from the start that. All right, we are, we are almost too different to talk like morally. Yeah, we, we, we. We don't have the same values where I would say we have like at least a lot of similar morally values.

[Benjamin]

I think, I think what. Actually this just reminds me of something else. I think a lot of people in the Israel Palestine debate really like they don't want the best for the other side. And I think both of us are guided by a wish for both people to thrive and we might not have the same answers to how we get there. But I don't think you feel that I like, hate Palestinians and I don't feel that you hate Israelis at all. No, I just want to add that my very best friend Rida, he's from Lebanon and his grandma is actually a Palestinian. And I feel the fact that, you know these kind of facts about me that I, that I like, I don't even want to. I don't feel I have the need to say it, but I will anyways that I'm not a racist or anything. I think that kind of makes the conversation possible. We're both guided by the wish that both people thrive. And I think that's like really important. If you speak with someone who you sense don't have that principle, that's where the conversation might just like break down. Yeah.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Have you had conversations with other people that broke down where you just can't have the conversation?

[Albert]

You can start with one.

[Benjamin]

Yeah, I've had multiple. Sometimes we had like an October 7th remembrance day in Copenhagen where there was like a. Some sort of anti. Demonstration towards that. And when we go. When we went for lunch, a Palestinian protester came up to us and when I talked with him, I kind of got very moralizing language and I felt that he wasn't arguing in good faith. And that's a conversation that broke down. And I have multiple. I've sometimes discussed it with my class, whom I just don't really feel are taking the Situation. Seriously. So, yeah, I've had also on Instagram, one of my good old friends situation just blocked me. Like, I think it was three months after October 7th. I had shared something on my story and she just wrote to me, like, do you support Israel? And when I said, yeah, I do, she kind of blocked me. And so I've had multiple incidents where the conversation just broke down from the get go.

[Albert]

Yeah. I would say primarily if I speak to someone who do not have any to very low information about the conflict and they don't care about having it. They don't care about facts. And therefore I feel like I have had a few conversations with a friend who just. If I, if I told him a, a new fact that he didn't know, he was just like, well, I just don't believe that. I just don't believe what you're saying. All right, but. But you don't really know much at all about this, so you can start by believing me. And therefore it broke down because I felt like we were just. We were just discussing facts instead of discussing how to the actual conflict. I was just trying to like, prove to him something that is obviously true, something that we can know for sure is happening. Yeah.

[Benjamin]

Was that within like a person who was pro Israeli or. Because what.

[Albert]

I think he was pro Palestinian.

[Benjamin]

Yeah, because what I think is really important and interesting about Albert is that when we discuss, he might take on a more pro Palestinian view and kind of try and turn my focus onto other facts or like ways of viewing the situation. But when you talk with people who are like, even further towards pro Palestinianism, I think you take on the perspective of trying to prove to them that their perspective might be biased. And I've actually done the same. Sometimes when I discuss with my family, I can feel that they are the ones who are blinded by bias. And then I try and take on a pro Palestinian view and try and tell them how they might not fully understand the situation. So I think we both do that. And that's another principle that really kind of makes the conversation between us possible. We aren't completely married to our ideas and, and we can try out different perspectives. Nuanced. Yeah, we try and.

[Albert]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I would say you would always. Your purpose would always be to try and nuance the other person that you are this. That you have the discussion with.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Yeah, yeah. It's very hard to let these guys go because you're just wonderful, really wonderful. I want to seriously bottle you and, and send whatever you've made between the two of you out into the world. Really, really wonderful.

[Albert]

Thank you so much.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Really. Can I just, I'm just. What do you want to do with your lives? Where are you going with all this wonderful capacities?

[Benjamin]

I'm not sure what I want to do. I want to go to the military in Denmark after school and then I want to go to Italy, learn Italian, go to Israel, maybe learn Hebrew. I think I have a, a hunger for learning which will guide me throughout my life. So I'll just go wherever there is an opportunity to learn.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Fantastic.

[Albert]

I want to also start with the military after high school and then I play music. So I want to just do something at least with, with music, with my life. I don't know exactly what yet, but if I just, yeah, just continue to play and, and do different things. I also want to travel and I want to live in different countries.

[Benjamin]

Yeah.

[Albert]

Meet nice people.

[Jonathan Friedland]

I somehow think that we have not heard the last of Benjamin and Albert either in Denmark or beyond. I think we're going to be hearing from both of you more in the future. Thank you both for bringing your story and your, your friendship to unheard of. Holy. So ora immediate thoughts on that extraordinary conversation.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

I, I, I love these guys. They're just, I mean they embody everything that we want the world to have which is like such respect for each other despite difference. Like a deep friendship, a deep, deep trust in each other and the capacity to really examine themselves and hear and learn from each other. I mean they're so young and they're so capable in that way. I really, I feel honored to have spent the time with them. I mean this is what this world needs. I don't know if you felt the same way.

[Jonathan Friedland]

No, I mean I was just going to say that first of all, you have to get past the jaw dropping fluency and eloquence of two teenagers in a second language. Once you're over that because that is mind blowing. The, the degree of emotional intelligence was tremendous. There was huge sort of wisdom in the way they are with each other. I just thought takeaways for our listeners potentially don't do this by text. They have learned.

[Yanit Levy]

I wrote that underlined.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Isn't that amazing?

[Yanit Levy]

Never fight on text.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Don't fight on text. That is a really, really important observation. The other thing I loved was this thing about the train ride. Their head together because one of them couldn't go away. And I've known a lot of people who've had these conversations. We've been talking about post October something conversations. Some of the best are when they are, for example, going for a walk together. So there isn't an option really to just go off because you're not at home, you're not on the phone. You can put phone. You know, put the phone down. I thought that was really tremendous. And then just the dynamic between them of mutual respect, it was very, very striking.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

And so not of a toxic masculinity quality where someone has to be right and arm down. The other is so beautiful. Really loved it.

[Yanit Levy]

And another good advice is sometimes you just need to talk about something else. I think. Yes, they were very. I mean, they're incredibly intelligent and the emotional intelligence. The intelligence, the knowledge. You think of this generation and you generalize and you say, oh, they read everything on TikTok. Well, no, they're actually curious. And doubt is such an important part of what they're talking about. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe you're right. Like, it's a very. It really is what you wish a conversation in. In the world could look like, really.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

And their attention to. Their attention to the relationship between them like that, that is part of how they sustain the conversation. How do we have the conversation is part of the conversation.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Absolutely. We just mentioned a couple of takeaways. I mean, part, you know, like, don't do this by text. Talk about other things. Are there other rules of the road, guidance you might offer for people who are listening to this, who themselves have had some difficult relationships, some strains in this very strange post, 10-7- universe we're now in? Any advice or lessons learned that you might offer for people who didn't come forward to have their conversations on unholy, but are having them?

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Well, first of all, I do want to say that the dyads that we spoke with are both like, fantastic examples of how to do this. I don't know how you manage to fish. These excellent dyads that are really showing.

[Yanit Levy]

Our listeners are all excellent, great.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

I mean, it really gives you hope about the world because it's not the typical conversations that you hear. But I think the idea of separating out the very specific content that you might disagree on and the process that you're moving through to have the conversation is super important. That constant attention to the process while you're trying to sort of sort through the complexity of the information and the facts and the possible solutions and the histories, the different histories involved, like attending to the process while you're doing that is super important. I mean, that's sort of the job of a therapist, the job of psychoanalyst. But as we can See, people can do that without the help of a therapist. Just keep attending to the process, attend to the friendship. Like, hold on to your perspective that the other person is a good person. Even if they think differently, they're a good person.

[Yanit Levy]

I have to add to that. I'm sharing. I hope it's okay, Jonathan. But we had, you know, one of our difficult conversations over the past two years. And I remember at some point Jonathan said to me, give me the benefit of the doubt, which I found such a poignant thing to say. And I kind of held on to that because. Because he was right. I mean, give me the benefit of the doubt. Right. That I come from a good place, that I mean well. And that's so important when you have that kind of, I think, disagreement.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Yeah, I mean, he put it very well, didn't he? I think it was Benjamin who was saying that he knows that Albert is coming from a good place, that they essentially. I mean, I didn't use this phrase, but essentially it's a conversation in good faith that they're having and your needs. Absolutely right about our why front, our ongoing conversation that we know that each of the other wants for the best and it's coming from good faith. I think that makes such a difference in these conversations. When they go really toxic, I think, is when you doubt really where the other person's coming from. Not about this or that fact about the west bank or whatever, but in behind that. What's really behind it? Is it something that you don't trust? And that's when things go toxic. These two obviously did have their underlying pattern is trust and good faith in each other.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

And the purpose of the conversation is not to win, but to learn.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Well, Orna, we are tremendously grateful to you because I think you did draw things from both of these encounters that were not, you know, immediately there, and you took them to a whole other level. These have been really illuminating, elevating conversations, and that's in large part down to you. So we are hugely grateful to you for bringing your expert eye and huge intelligence to this. These difficult conversations. So our gratitude to you as well.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Well, thank you for saying that, but I honestly, I. I feel grateful for the time I've spent with the two of you and with these dyads. I really do. It's like it's given me more hope, so thank you.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Well, hope perhaps it's something we'll do, we'll do again in the future. I think there's going to be any shortage of need. Need for it.

[Yanit Levy]

That's Definitely true. Thank you so much, Ona.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

Take good care.

[Yanit Levy]

So we have another pair, another fascinating pair, and we will bring that conversation very, very soon to you.

[Jonathan Friedland]

We will. And we are grateful, of course, to Ono Goralnik for bringing her expert ear and mind to that fascinating conversation. So it is awards time. Gosh, there's quite a lot for us to go through shows.

[Yanit Levy]

We have to tell our listeners. There's always like a lot of stuff in the chutzpah column. Then we get to the mention, we're.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Like, I know it's terrible. The cupboard is so often bare when it comes to righteousness, but chutzpah, we have lots of it. You've got an absolutely choice one. But just in the run up to that, I'm just going to mention another couple of candidates that were there.

[Albert]

One is.

[Jonathan Friedland]

I mean, look, some people would maybe. I could imagine some people think this deserves a mention. Well, Award Trump's personal lawyer Robert Garson told the Telegraph newspaper that discussions are underway within the Trump administration about granting asylum to Jewish people from, guess where? The United Kingdom, deciding that me and the small Jewish community of Great Britain deserves protection, that we should be branded refugees because of anti Semitism in the uk. Look, I don't downplay the fact that antisemitism is on the rise here, but Phil Garson, who is apparently himself British born, to say that the UK is no longer a safe place for Jews, it's not helpful. I mean, you know, there are problems, there are challenges. We've heard them from around the Jewish world over this year, but it's not at that point. And there is some weird thing going on, on the American right of constantly, particularly glumming onto the uk. Elon Musk does this all the time, saying it's about to break out into civil war, war and that, you know, the. That the country is just falling apart. It's. It's a sort of Internet meme. It's a particular Elon Musk kind of X meme. I don't think it's the real world and I don't think this is hugely helpful. So that's one candidate. The other thing, I think this is a story we might just want to keep an eye on. According to a report in Aretz, Israel police this week allowed Jews to enter the Temple Mount Al Aqsa compound in Jerusalem with printed pages of prayer. You know, the sort of daft Tefillah kind of thing where you have a prayer printed out on a piece of paper. It's a small thing, but under the official rules, those are not meant to be allowed. People will know there's a whole carefully worked out status quo for Jerusalem and for rather the holy sites in Jerusalem, specifically the Temple Mount. And under the rules, Jews have been allowed to visit, visit, but not pray on that part of the Temple Mount. Muslims pray there. Everything, as people know, is such a powder keg there. This seems to be just an ever so slight change of what's allowed. Those rules apparently have been loosening and according to this report in Haaret, there was a further loosening where the official Temple Mount Yeshiva handed out copies of the Amida, the standing prayer, so that people, people could, Jews could pray on that site. The finger is pointed in the reporting to the new chief of police in Jerusalem, who is himself appointed, of course by Itamard Bengvir, the very far right security minister who, you know, likes to push the envelope. Right now this is not anything anybody needs. It's a powder keg. Don't play with lit matches. That would be my thought and that's why it's a mention in this chutzpah category. But I think you have, have a, a strong candidate for this award.

[Yanit Levy]

Yes, I, I'll just mention that the issue of Itamal Benil, the far right minister, and his intervening in what is happening inside the police is something that we will dedicate, I think a longer conversation to, because it is the thing to watch. My chutzpah nominee is following a, uh, book, uh, by Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, in which he. It's an upcoming book, it's called, uh, Where We Keep the Light. And he describes in that book that made a lot of headlines this week, the former Vice President Kamal Harris and her election team asked him whether he was, quote, an agent of the Israeli government while discussing his potential as a vice presidential candidate. Look, we discussed this at length when Kamala Harris was vetting Josh Shapiro and then decided at the end not to go with him if indeed this happens. And she did not respond. Neither did her team or former team. This is, I think, beyond chutzpah to ask that of a governor in the United States. I mean, that's just, it's pretty shocking actually.

[Jonathan Friedland]

It's such a hoary old trope about Jews and their loyalties and suggesting that a Jewish politician elected by the people of Pennsylvania would really have loyalty at an earlier point in his life to a foreign government. It's just really invidious. And it does suggest that that blind spot that's putting it very kindly, that does exist in parties of the left around this issue was not just confined to sort of activists who gave Josh Shapiro a very hard time in the 2024 campaign. I mean, it was noted that actually his position on the Gaza war was further to the left than, for example, Tim Walls. He was more opposed to the war, he was more stringent in his criticism of Netanyahu, and yet he was immediately branded by people who didn't want him to be chosen as the vice presidential nominee as genocide. Josh. As if he was somehow implicated in that.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

That.

[Jonathan Friedland]

In that terrible accusation. There is a kind of anti Semitism there. And I think the. This story sheds an uncomfortable light on it.

[Yanit Levy]

Yeah, it really does. And I think at the end of the day, you know, we had this discussion when it happened in real time. I think at the end of the day, the reason not to choose him in part was also because he is more charismatic than she is. And perhaps you didn't want to be upstaged, but for him, I think it just paved the way for 2028. Right. I mean, it's not a bad thing for him that this didn't work out in the end.

[Jonathan Friedland]

Yeah, no, I agree. And we should perhaps also clock. He's had some tough time. There was a firebomb attack on the governor's residence there in Pennsylvania. He's, you know, it's been a bruising period for him. But you're right, in a way, it may well have worked out better for him that he didn't get on that ticket. Mench Award, I look to you.

[Yanit Levy]

So my mental ward is slightly funny. It goes back to the history of unholy. I think one of the first episodes, Jonathan was, don't want to say showing off, but saying that his favorite show was Le Bureau in a French show about their intelligence agency. Yes, that's right. Just talking from memory, I tried to see that series. I didn't manage to get it anywhere in Israel. It wasn't streaming. And I think I even, even at some point said to you that all streaming services are anti Semites because they won't let me see it in Israel. And here is where I'm leading into a compliment for my competing channel, which is channel 11. It's the public. It's the publicly funded network Khan. And they bought the rights to this series and they will air it, which means I will finally get to see this series. I know it's a slightly strange Mensch Award this week.

[Jonathan Friedland]

No, Very happy, very on board with this. Very on board with you praising the public. Broadcast it in that way and you I've got such a treat in store in store for you. I think they called it Hasok not like the Agency. Whereas I think the Bureau is. Has a different sound to me, to my ear. But fine, it's all good and it is an absolute brilliant TV show. I do notice that we have had a sort of TV theme running through this episode.

[Yanit Levy]

That this is the. The sin of someone who takes a co host. That's from tv.

[Jonathan Friedland]

But we had our own little couples therapy experience thanks to Orna Gorall. But that we have referenced to, you know, the newsreader via Australia, now the bureau via France. We are global in our pop culture appetites. Sex and the City got a mention as well via Carrie Bradshaw. I think we have been TV tastic in this week's episode. Which reminds you to you can Watch us on YouTube if you like.

[Yanit Levy]

This week I think you can even do who Wore It Better. We're doing the same color shirt again.

[Dr. Orna Goralnik]

We are?

[Jonathan Friedland]

Yes. No, that's right.

[Yanit Levy]

So you can. Yeah, you can do that if you want.

[Jonathan Friedland]

I think that's a listener. That's a TV format with no legs at all. Your neat or Jonathan who Wore It Better. I think the people know the outcome of that one week after week. We should say thank you to Michal Porat for producing us so expertly and.

[Yanit Levy]

We'Ll meet next week.

[Jonathan Friedland]

See you then.