With a prophet's eye and a folksy way of putting things, former President George W. Bush predicted a month ago, soon after the October 7 massacres, the diplomatic predicament Israel would soon find itself in.
“We need to support Israel, no ifs and buts. This is an unprovoked attack by terrorist people willing to kill innocent people to achieve an objective,” he said. “Don’t be surprised if Israel takes whatever action is necessary to defend herself, and it's going to be ugly for a while.”
Then he added: “There is going to be weariness. You watch, the world is going to be [saying], ‘Ok, let's negotiate. Israel’s got to negotiate. They are not going to negotiate. These people [Hamas] have played their cards. They want to kill as many Israelis as they can, and negotiations with killers is not an option for the elected government of Israel. So we are going to have to remain steadfast, but it is not going to take long for people to say, ‘it’s going on for too long; sure there is a way to settle this, through negotiations; both sides are guilty.’ My view is one side is guilty, and it is not Israel.”
That is moral clarity. French President Emmanuel Macron had it for a short while in the immediate aftermath of October 7, when the pure evil of Hamas was on gory display for everyone to see. He even came to Israel, one of a slew of leaders to come and show solidarity.
That was then
On Friday, in a BBC interview, Macron’s view seemed to change dramatically, from understanding that “one side is guilty, and it's not Israel,” to shifting the blame to Israel.
Macron, who in the interview said he recognizes Israel’s right to protect itself, asserted, however, that the only solution now is a ceasefire “because it is impossible to explain, ‘We want to fight terrorism, by killing innocent civilians.’”
There are a couple of problems with that statement. First, there is an inherent contradiction between supporting Israel’s right to protect itself and a ceasefire. A ceasefire means Hamas’ capabilities are not destroyed, which means it will live to kill Israelis another day.
Secondly, Macron’s statement that it is impossible to fight terrorism by killing innocent civilians sounded distinctly like the French president was saying that Israel is intentionally killing civilians. He called President Isaac Herzog on Sunday to clarify that this was not his intention.
That was not the worst part of the interview
“De facto, Palestinian civilians are being bombed,” he said. “De facto, babies, ladies, old people are being bombed and killed. There is no reason for that and no legitimacy, so we do urge Israel to stop.”
Again, what Macron failed to mention was that babies, ladies, and old people were being killed because Hamas embedded itself among them.
His words reflect the problem Israel is facing in certain capitals: an erosion of legitimacy for continuing the war against Hamas. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in rejecting Macron’s criticism on Saturday evening, hinted that it has to do with politics and the large Muslim population in France that has taken to the street in large protests.
But France is not the only country with large Muslim populations who have seen major pro-Hamas rallies. A huge anti-Israel rally of some 300,000 people took place in London on Saturday. Yet Britain’s government has not joined France’s call for a ceasefire.
A day after the huge London protest, British Defense Minister Grant Shapps, in a Sky interview, gave a spirited defense of Israel, a welcome contrast to Macron’s comments.
Asked about Macron’s call for a ceasefire, Shapps said that Israel needs to take every step possible to protect the civilian population and abide by international humanitarian law. Then he added, “Something we all know from when London was bombed in the Blitz, and from when we bombed Dresden, for example, is that sometimes civilians get hurt in wars.”
He pointed out that Israel was attacked, and that unlike in World War II, where the Allied bombing of Germany was indiscriminate, “Israel is going out of its way to try to protect civilians, making extraordinary phone calls to people to ask them to help clear areas where they know Hamas is hiding in that network of extraordinary tunnels under the ground.”
Had Britain been attacked by terrorists and 1,400 Brits lost their lives in their own country, he said, “the idea that we would not pursue the terrorist organization when we knew where they were, and that anyone would tell Britain that we should not do that, I think would be rather improbable and extraordinary.”
Shapps made clear that Britain supports humanitarian pauses, but not a ceasefire that would allow Hamas to keep its arsenal of rockets and missiles to fire another day.
Shapps' words contradicted not only Macron but also a number of reports in recent days of a shift in Western attitudes toward Israel’s actions. As proof of an impatience with Israel, some pointed to comments Friday by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken that “far too many Palestinians have been killed.”
Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and National Unity Minister Benjamin Gantz -- who all took Macron to task for his comments -- also believe that too many Palestinians have been killed, but they blame that on Hamas. Were Hamas to surrender, were Hamas to free the hostages, were Hamas leaders to leave Gaza, the war would stop. It is telling that Macron did not call for any of that, just for a ceasefire.
Or, as Bush predicted, “There is going to be weariness. You watch, the world is going to say, “Ok, let's negotiate. Israel’s got to negotiate.” Replace the word “negotiate” with “agree to a ceasefire,” and Bush predicted the future.
The former US president also added, however, that Israel is “not going to negotiate,” or -- in the present context -- not going to agree to a ceasefire.
While Macron’s BBC interview shows that the diplomatic space Israel has to work with is narrowing a bit, Shapps' comment, along with the US not pressuring for a ceasefire -- but rather humanitarian pauses -- shows that space has not yet constricted altogether.