Diplomacy—unlike the approach of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy—requires delicacy. Especially when it involves relations with a power as crucial to Israel as the U.S. And even more so when that power is led by Donald Trump.
That is why Israel’s expression of opposition to the direct, extraordinary talks between the U.S. and Hamas has been articulated in the most careful and subdued manner. In fact, it takes a Rashi-level interpretation to decipher what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu truly thinks about the matter.
“In contacts with the United States, Israel has expressed its opinion on direct talks with Hamas,” the Prime Minister’s Office declared in a cryptic statement.
Anyone who can crack this riddle can understand just how delicately Jerusalem is treading when the intended recipient is Trump. After all, Netanyahu’s statement does not specify what exactly Israel’s “opinion” was. Readers are left to draw their own conclusions.
It is, of course, obvious that Israel’s “opinion” is not positive. If it were, Netanyahu would not hesitate to praise and commend Trump, as he often does. Moreover, Israel and the U.S. have maintained a decades-long policy of avoiding any contact with Hamas due to its murderous terrorism. That was true before Oct. 7, 2023, and it is exponentially more so now.
Furthermore, in the codes of diplomacy, direct talks grant mutual recognition and legitimacy. For Hamas, the very fact of meeting with an American representative is a significant achievement, regardless of the content of the talks or whether they lead anywhere.
Israel is clearly opposed to granting Hamas such a prize. After all, if direct meetings of this kind posed no issue for Israel, it would conduct them itself, rather than relying on mediators such as Egypt or Qatar, a no less problematic interlocutor.
A disregard for diplomatic formalities
For all these reasons, there is no doubt that the unspecified “opinion” of Netanyahu’s office was negative, perhaps very negative. And for anyone still unconvinced by the circumstantial evidence, an informed source told Israel Hayom, “This is a highly problematic move, to say the least.”
In any case, Israel’s opinion did not persuade Trump. After all, he dispatched Adam Boehler, his appointee overseeing negotiations for the recovery of U.S. hostages held by non-state actors and of U.S. citizens wrongfully detained by foreign states, to meet with Hamas representatives in Doha. The 47th U.S. president took this step because he does not believe in diplomatic formalities. Trump, as we recall, met with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un during his previous term despite a longstanding American embargo.
Trump also sent his representatives to meet with the Taliban, who had killed U.S. soldiers, solely to reach an agreement to end the war in Afghanistan. The reason for all these moves is that Trump is a man of results, not processes. He does not care how exactly a hostage deal is reached. As long as the U.S. is not paying exorbitant costs, the protocol along the way is irrelevant to him. The bottom line is what matters.
And so, Israel has expressed its “opinion,” but it has clearly not been accepted. The question now is whether this problematic path Trump is pursuing will lead to results.
Originally published by Israel Hayom.
