Latest / The Pluralist Podcast - with Orly Erez-Likhovski and Rabbi Josh Weinberg / The Fight Over Liberal Zionism with J Street's Nadav Tamir
Transcript
- Orly Erez Likhovski: back to the Pluralist Podcast from both sides of the ocean. I'm Orly Erez-Likhovski Executive Director of the Israel Religious Action Center. Josh Weinberg: I'm Rabbi Josh Weinberg, the Vice President for Israel and Reform Zionism for the URJ and Director of ARZA Great to be with you, Orly. Orly Erez Likhovski: Yeah, wonderful, Josh. And today we're going to talk about J Street, about liberal Zionism, and how do we continue to engage in a productive discourse around Israel despite disagreements. But before we get into that, tell me a little bit how you're doing. You were just this week on the Israel Day Parade in New York, which I know was quite an experience. Josh Weinberg: Yes, yes. Well, I'm really looking forward to this conversation because I think it touches on some of the real. critical issues and controversial issues, especially on this side of the ocean North America. And yeah, it's been a week. We started off with a conference talking about Reform Judaism ⁓ week and some of the big issues, especially ⁓ and anti-Zionism, how that plays out. And then we had the opportunity to meet a Knesset delegation who got a little bit heated, especially with our... diplomat Ofir Akunis really sort of losing it at us and going off and what was supposed to be just a few words of blessings at the end and launching into a speech. And of course, Knesset speaker Amir Ohana you know, not understanding the conversation when we were worried about the Kotel bill and the Who is a Jew bill. And he's like, you know, don't worry, it won't pass. And we're saying what? Okay, that's comforting, as we say in Hebrew, it's not quite the whole thing. I don't think he understands the full implications. then, of course, the Israel Day Parade, which I was not aware that finance minister and minister in the Defense Ministry, Bezalel Smotrich, going to be there, which I have to does change things quite a bit ⁓ to see that. I think our listeners are... my God, yeah. mean, ⁓ yeah. ⁓ listen, to see some of the prominent Democrats of the state. Of course, everyone knows that Mayor Zohran Mamdani did not show Orly Erez Likhovski: the picture of them, them at the beginning of the parade with, yeah, yeah. Josh Weinberg: quite intentionally did not come and also had words to say about Smotrich's appearance there. And not just Smotrich Amichai Eliyahu Ofir Sofer some of our, Orly, your best friends, I think, in the Knesset that you love so much. Orly Erez Likhovski: For sure. Yeah. Josh Weinberg: And that's a big problem. But in the end of the day, I think it's still important for us to show up and to be there, even if we vehemently disagree with Israel's representatives to the parade. And it's a stance to say, you know, we... We stand up for Israel. are Zionists. We believe in a strong, know, secure Jewish and democratic state. You know, all the talking points. And my hope is that more liberal Jews would show up and it's not just, you know, dignitaries from Israel waving the flag and posing for the camera. it's also real engagement. Yeah. Orly Erez Likhovski: But this of course does not, but this does not take anything from the fact that we are appalled by the Kahanists and by the racist and extremist ministers who are leading this government. ⁓ to take a bit from that. I think it's a really, yeah, ⁓ I think talking about how we stand ⁓ in support of Israel despite so many terrible things that are happening now is really a good segue to the conversation we're going to have today. So take us there, Josh. Josh Weinberg: No, no question. ⁓ absolutely, absolutely. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. So let's talk of course, know, J Street has been on the scene for close to 20 years now and it as an alternative to AIPAC and Nadav will be able to share with us a little bit more of the history. But of you know, the big controversy was in the news recently when at a gathering in Washington, DC a little while ago, Israeli Ambassador Yechiel Leiter sharply attacked J Street really ⁓ terrible words, but words that resonate with us you know, ⁓ Jewish history will tell us. And he his criticisms especially on J Street's positions around US military or foreign military financing and, you weapons sales to Israel. Now I think that those comments were really quite alarming because they suggested that we can't engage in a meaningful discussion even within the Jewish community along the political and ideological spectrum labeling someone as illegitimate or outside the tent. Now don't get me wrong, there are people and there are groups that I would deem outside the tent and not legitimate. However, that's part of the conversation. And I think it raised really once again the question of how we can criticize Israel or the Israeli government or policy without being accused of greater anti-Semitism or anti-Zionism. And it begs the question of what is the role of liberal Zionist Jews in North America, even when they deeply, deeply oppose or have adverse reaction the Israeli government ⁓ and are committed to the future and the well-being of Israel and Israelis. today's conversation is not just about J Street, it's really about the liberal Zionist community more And how do we respond to this kind of rhetoric? How do we hold serious disagreements about Israel in a polarized environment, especially after October 7th? And to help us navigate this is our guest, Nadav Tamir, who is the executive director of J Street Israel. Nadav, thank you so much for being here. Orly, tell us a little bit about about Nadav Orly Erez Likhovski: Yes, so Nadav is, as you said, the executive director of J Street Israel and a long-time Israeli diplomat, foreign policy expert and a leading voice on Israel diaspora relations and liberal Zionism. Before joining J Street, Nadav served as a senior advisor to Israel's ninth president, Shimon Peres, until the end of his term in 2014. And over the course of his diplomatic career, he served at Israel's embassy in Washington, held senior positions in Israel's foreign ministry and served as Israel Consul General in Boston. And today, in addition to his work at J Street Israel, Tamir serves as an international affairs advisor at the Peres Center for Peace and Innovation. And he's also active in several leading Israeli policy and security initiatives, including MITVIM, Israel Institute for Regional Policies, the Geneva Initiatives, and Commanders for Israel's Security. Nadav, thank you so much for joining us today. Nadav Tamir: Thank you so much for having me, Orly and Josh. Orly Erez Likhovski: So, you know, let's start with going back a little bit, you know, to your background that you just mentioned, and you have really spent much of your career representing Israel in the foreign ministry, in Washington, in Boston, as we heard, and also with President Peres. brought you from that world into J Street? Nadav Tamir: Yeah, actually, J Street was created when I was Consul General to New England based in Boston. And it was after already serving in Washington, D.C. and getting to know the kind of pro-Israel mainstream organizations. And then I was ⁓ in Boston a student at the Kennedy School of Government as a Wexner fellow, I got to know the real Jews, not the professional Jews, excuse me for saying that. Josh Weinberg: Mm-hmm. Nadav Tamir: And I learned that those organizations that I met in Washington did not represent so many Jews who felt that they care deeply about Israel, but they were told that the only way to care about Israel is to agree with the Israeli governments and to accept the Hasbara messages and any ⁓ attempt to also see the interest of the Palestinians or talk about a Palestinian state is out of the discussion. So when J-Street was great. I said, ⁓ that's great. I really want that there will be a political home for all those Jews that were so conflicted about their love for Israel and did not know to explain to their kids, you why they're Zionist while bad things were happening. And actually, J Street gave them a way to be pro-Israel in a way that is aligned with their progressive slash liberal values. So I it a great idea, but I was still part of the government but later I found myself in a situation where I could not represent the Israeli governments who became more and more right-wing. felt that I'm I cannot look at the mirror when do that. So ⁓ I had the opportunity to ⁓ being a diplomat, serving my country rather than my government as J Street Israel director, I was very happy. And I'm so happy to be in a place where my expertise and connections are aligned with my passion. Orly Erez Likhovski: And can you tell us what is your experience in diplomacy teach you, like going into this role in J Street, about the relationship between Israel and American Jewry? Nadav Tamir: Sure, so first of all, my first position in the foreign ministry was in the office of Shimon Peres as foreign minister in the days of Oslo. And I got very invested in the peace process. And so firsthand, an Israeli government that really tried to influence, you know, our situation ⁓ the most Zionist way of having agency and doing something and initiate. And then ⁓ when was in Washington, I was witnessing how American foreign policy could make miracles. I remember when I was there, it was the Balkans, was the collapse of Yugoslavia and the bloodshed in Bosnia, Herzegovina, and then in Kosovo. And I saw how active American diplomacy... was really fixing things in a way that was unbelievable. Later, when I was at the Kennedy School, I studied the case study on the Good Friday's Accord in Northern Ireland. And I also saw how American proactive diplomacy really made things so much better. And I said, why not in our region? Why American foreign policy does not succeed ⁓ bringing an Israeli-Palestinian agreement? And then I realized that part of the reason was that The conversation from the Jewish community, the voices that came out made it suicidal for American politicians to say the right things about the conflict and to speak about the need for a Palestinian state. then I realized that if I really want to help my country and design its vision of a democratic homeland ⁓ the Jewish people, I have ⁓ try to use my expertise in America. diplomacy and American politics because I strongly believe that if we don't end the occupation the occupation will end us and I don't think that we could do it without American help. Josh Weinberg: And just to build on that, know, in thinking about the willingness for some governments to accept American ⁓ or intervention or guidance, you know, the famous picture of, you know, Clinton with Rabin and Arafat there, you know, who really invested so much in it. What were some things that you took away from your work with Shimon Peres? I'm asking because, know, the younger generation today has really known no other prime minister besides Netanyahu right now. And take us back a little bit to different kind of leadership style a little bit and what you gleaned from that. Nadav Tamir: Yeah, there are several very important insights about diplomacy and leadership that I learned from Shimon Peres. And don't get me wrong, he's definitely not perfect. Unlike the right wingers that have personality cults, we're not. I could speak also about some big mistakes that he did, but essentially he really believed that the... Orly Erez Likhovski: you Nadav Tamir: he really believed that that one of the main reasons of Zionism was to take the not only to take the Jew out of the shtetl, but also to take the shtetl out of the Jew and that we have to initiate and we have to take responsibility and we can't just live in this blame game that, you know, it's always the Gentiles fault. But and he was very influenced by his mentor Ben-Gurion who declared independence even though he knew he going to be attacked by and he really also believed in optimism. ⁓ of the main reasons of Zionism was ⁓ not only to the Jew out of the shtetl, but also to take the shtetl out of the Jew and that we have to initiate and we have to take responsibility and we can't just live in this blame game that, you know, it's always the Gentiles fault. which very much, you know, connect to our national anthem, Hatikva, while I felt that the leadership that came after him preferred fear and hate than Hatikva, than hope. So he had this kind of approach of always looking forward, what can we do? How can we improve rather than engage in the endless, you know, propaganda wars of who is to blame and So he had this kind of approach of always looking forward, what can we do? for me, ⁓ ⁓ so needed and it's so... And ⁓ as Israelis that are hearing years... Israelis that are for we're ⁓ by the that hates us. Well, I so many Arabs and Palestinians who really ⁓ want to in peace. diplomats ⁓ who really admire. Exactly, who admire Israel and to help us. we're ⁓ by the that hates us. Well, I so many Arabs and Palestinians who really ⁓ want to in peace. And I know so many European diplomats ⁓ who really Exactly, who admire Israel and want to help us. And they're being portrayed by our governments as if they're anti-Semites and if they... ⁓ Josh Weinberg: And who are willing to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. And who are willing to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Nadav Tamir: So we need to go back to a situation where Israel works with the world. Especially now, I believe we never had a bigger opportunity in front of us. So we need to go back to a situation where Israel works with the world. Especially now, I believe we never had a bigger opportunity in front of us. we in J Street called the 23 state solution, rather than just talk about two states. ⁓ It was never as real as concrete. Exactly. Josh Weinberg: being sort of the entire Middle East. Yeah, yeah. Orly Erez Likhovski: the entire region. yeah. I really think that Peres had this vision we often say that our, you know, the people on the other side of the political spectrum in Israel have a very clear vision of what they want and they're working tirelessly to implement it. And our side, we have a huge lack of leadership of people daring to take for peace. And I think is something that Peres and Rabin were to do and obviously is really missing from the leadership today. ⁓ Nadav Tamir: Yeah, but I want to add that it's not just taking a risk for peace because peace is a moral thing. They really believe that I believe that this is also the only way for Israel to be secure. I don't think we would ever be secure if the Palestinian people will not be secure and free in their country. And I don't think that we will ever be integrated into the region the way the region actually want us to be integrated without solving the Palestinian And one of the mistakes of Orly Erez Likhovski: completely. Nadav Tamir: Oslo and Camp David and Annapolis was not understanding that we also need the region to solve the Palestinian issue. So you cannot solve it without the region and you could not integrate in the region without solving it. Orly Erez Likhovski: completely. Josh Weinberg: Yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense. And I want to, I want to shift the conversation a little bit to talk about, you know, Zionism and, ⁓ know, how that plays out in North America versus Israel. Nadav, would you just, how, your ⁓ view your perspective changed after October ⁓ 7th little bit in terms of that conversation or that need for making peace or reaching out or revamping any sort of diplomatic efforts or anything like that. Just from your point of view. Nadav Tamir: Yeah, well, first of all, October 7th was very personal for me. I have family and friends in the Kibbutzim. Some of them hostages, some them were killed. My ⁓ home, ⁓ I up in Kibbutz Manara, was evacuated and most of the buildings got hit by Hezbollah rockets. I completely understand the trauma, I understand the pain, but actually... ⁓ October 7th showed me that we were in the wrong direction in so many ways. From ⁓ Gaza unilaterally instead of empowering the partner on the other side because of this ⁓ that there is no partner, to Abraham Accords where if we have no partner... ⁓ Josh Weinberg: Just referring back to the 2005 disengagement, Ariel Sharon, right, of course, yeah, just to. Orly Erez Likhovski: to the disengagement. Nadav Tamir: Exactly. Or the Abraham Accords who said, ⁓ maybe we could bypass the Palestinians. I think those two things exploded in our face and showed us that even when we have one of the most sophisticated militaries in the world, it's not going to protect us without really diplomatic agreements, just like we have ⁓ with and with Egypt. ⁓ Josh Weinberg: Egypt. Orly Erez Likhovski: Yeah, and that you can't obviously sort of somehow manage conflict without bringing about a political solution because it will blow up in our face as it actually did. Nadav Tamir: Exactly. The management of the conflict exploded in our face. So for me, October 7th. Most of my lessons from October 7th are exactly the opposite of people are now kind of expressing that peace is not possible. Actually, it is so clear that ⁓ have to empower the moderate Palestinians who want peace. the that Israel took was empowering Hamas. And it's quite clear that even, know, we have issues with Jordan and Egypt, but the border is safe when I had to go back to Israel during the war, the first war with Iran, I did it through Sharm el-Sheikh in Egypt, which was very safe. And also that you know, that security will never be achieved without diplomacy. And I'm saying it as someone who fought in Lebanon in the first Lebanon war. And now my son was in Lebanon. And I see how, you know, how we're returning the same mistakes as if more ⁓ military could really bring security without serving any diplomatic strategy. And I do believe that this diplomatic strategy is now more available the sense of urgency in the region and the world to solve this is more than ever. And this is the huge opportunity that is in front of us. Josh Weinberg: Well, I hope that we can capitalize on that opportunity, of course. And I want to think about this in terms of the diaspora, specifically the North American story. And think, you know. With J Street's founding, there was this dichotomy between J Street or AIPAC both trying to foreign policy of the United States and very different visions of what should be. First of all, do you think it's accurate to say that Israeli Jews and American liberal Jews are speaking different languages, whether it's political languages or moral languages, when they talk about Israel? And broader than that, I think In some circles, J Street has this visceral reaction by people of just feeling like they are anathema to everything that we stand for in terms of Zionism, Jewish peoplehood, supporting Israel. Help us understand why, I don't know if you share, if you've seen, know, felt that at some point and help us understand why that might be and where that's coming from. Nadav Tamir: First of all, of course, we cannot generalize because Jews are not all the same and Israeli Jews are not all the same. But in general, one of the things that I learned when I served in the US, ⁓ I really liked about American Jews, is that you guys understand what it means to be a minority. And that's why you that we, the of the Jewish people who have to be a model of Tikkun Olam, we have to treat minorities in a better way. And you guys who live in a mostly Christian country understand how important it is to have separation between state and religion. So there are some things that that we Israeli Jews, many of us forgot. And I think that's that's one of the of the differences. Another difference is that many Israeli Jews treat you in a very instrumental way. You are our ATM. You have to support ⁓ with money. You have supporters with lobby to promote what we want in in in know with with the government and you have to do aliyah but it was never kind of a mutual relationship of two, you know two-way street as I understood when I came there that Jewish is means that you are part of this and we have to listen to you and and if most American Jews ⁓ feel that Israeli government is going in in a in a wrong way have to speak out ⁓ that's the best way to your love for a place, for caring for a place. And because you guys don't vote in Israel, you cannot play the Israeli political game, but you can do it in the US. And that's why the J Street theory of is to actually utilize the fact most American Jews are in this liberal Zionism space in order to it also politically more ⁓ in American politics in order to also influence American foreign policy to help Israel to achieve and to remain a democracy. Orly Erez Likhovski: Yeah, know, Nadav, I really agree with you that, you know, since Israel is the state of the Jewish people, the home of all the Jewish people, then Jews have the right to, you know, criticize it and say which direction it should go. And during the pro-democracy protest of 2023, I kept saying this on my visit to the U.S., telling people, it's not only your right, it's your duty to help us, you know, keep Israel back on track on being a Jewish and democratic state. I do want to ask you, whether things have changed after October 7th, because we are seeing a different reality both in Israel and in the States, obviously in Israel with the terrible loss and trauma that you have referred to, and in the US with a really, really growing anti-Semitic attacks and anti-Israel sentiments, know, and sometimes it's not only anti-government, it is anti-Semitic and anti-Israel. I understand that criticizing Israel has become much more difficult for people because, know, that's like objectively, that's what happened. And I want to ask you whether you think that after October 7th, this balance of, you know, standing up for Israel and yet criticizing it without, of course, giving up the Israel's right for existence and for peace and security, whether this balance has changed. Nadav Tamir: So first of all, what we criticize is not Israel per se, we criticize policies. We are, you know, and completely ⁓ even necessary after October 7th, because after October 7th, I think most people understood it's not just Yariv Levin and Rothman who are going after our legal branch of government. It's ⁓ also serving Gvir and Smotrich in their Jewish supremacy approach, both for Palestinians with the citizens of Israel and in the territories and the voice of liberal Zionists is even more necessary. On top of it, you saw a government that, yeah, of course, the started ⁓ as very justified war and J Street was all there, you know, and Biden was all there. But at some point, it became so obvious that ⁓ the war not intended to bring security. It was intended to keep a government and to keep Netanyahu away from his trials. And instead of using the fact that Blinken went 11 times to the region to sure we have the support of all the Arab countries to create alternative for Hamas and the same in Lebanon with Hezbollah, the Netanyahu government just went, you know, ⁓ forward a war that even you the moral issue aside that so many Gazan civilians got killed and so many Lebanese and the violence in the West Bank, even if you put that aside, even from strategic, know, became a pariah state. Israel is losing its relations with all the liberal democracies of the world. This is not good for Israel. So if American Jews care about Israel, they have to speak out after October 7th even more. Now I have to say that it's true that we have some people on our right flank who did not like the fact that we were critical during war and we had people on our left flank who thought that we were too supportive of Biden even though he did not stop the war. But actually we grew because I think that there are more people than people realize who are looking for nuance, who are looking for a place where you could hold different truths at the same time and care about the suffering of the Israelis and the Palestinians at the same time and don't see it as a zero-sum game. Josh Weinberg: Yeah, well, I appreciate all of that and that I think that makes sense. And I want to dive right into sort of the heart of the matter, I think, which even before the question of military support came up, there were people who just had this visceral reaction to J Street. And I'm still trying to figure out, you know, ⁓ because than ⁓ liberal or left-wing organizations, you know, and it seems to me that's been exacerbated by perceived positions on US military support US military financing. Help us understand ⁓ what J Street's position on that? How did it come about? And what people not understand about the approach to this major question of States support when it comes to making sure that Israel maintains its what we call the QME, right? Qualitative Military Edge. Nadav Tamir: Yes, Street is definitely for strong security relations between the US and Israel. We believe that Israel has real security threats and it's the right thing for America to help protect Israel. But we do believe and now it's also what Netanyahu says it's what Huckabee says that the old concept that it should be subsidized by American taxpayers money is just Non-sustainable there are too many Americans who cannot you know? ⁓ who don't have health insurance like we have in Israel, who look at Israel as this amazing economy with a GDP that is stronger than ⁓ many countries and say, why should we pay for the money that Israel buy? And I think that is now not even an argument. It is ⁓ a approach. And even, Netanyahu, understand it. ⁓ So the fact that they attack us for it, it's just crazy. And it shows you that people are really uncomfortable that we became so powerful in the Democratic Party. The second thing is about fact that we believe and take Israel and the US away. Any country in the world that doesn't use its support in order to promote ⁓ values and interests is just crazy. I can tell you as an Israeli that when, I don't know, Myanmar is buying weapons from Israel and are using using it for the massacre of the Rohingya I'm completely against it. I don't want it to happen as an Israeli. And I don't think and when you give it to, I don't know, to Ukraine, you have to make sure that Ukraine is the aid in a way that is aligned with your values and interests. And I think that in the Israeli case, American law was not implemented because American law, for example, the Leahy Amendment is saying that The aid could not be used violations of human rights. It not be used to prevent humanitarian assistance to civilians. ⁓ And believe that those laws should be implemented ⁓ in case of Israel, just like in the case of any other ⁓ ally the US. And I do believe that this makes lot of sense, but because the military aid such a kind of a myth, people say something that is not in line with the tradition, people think that we are against helping Israel be secure. Josh Weinberg: don't necessarily understand the difference conditioning aid or restricting aid, some of the terms that were used. like, know, I wish it were apples to apples that we say, you know, if, America held back one more ⁓ fighter jets, then Americans would have more healthcare, right? Like I, ⁓ not quite the same, you know, it's, the are not that fungible that, ⁓ you it would go for one thing or another. ⁓ And think that people are desperately concerned about ⁓ the waning relationship and the growing criticism so that if even, you know, one thing starts to say, ⁓ okay, well, we should condition or it shouldn't be used for this or that, then it's going to be a very slippery slope to losing American support altogether. So how can you people of those ⁓ and concerns ⁓ from your position or J Street's position as I think people are genuinely ⁓ afraid? Nadav Tamir: First of all, fear and anxiety is part of the Jewish story and maybe more even than other people. So it's completely natural. But I actually think that if we want to maintain the security relations, we have to make it, ⁓ has to be based on values and interest. And if it will be seen as if Israel is getting some kind of a special treatment, will hurt Israel. It will actually increase anti-Semitism. you hear now, especially after the Iran war, so many people that saying why Israel is taking America into wars that are not helping America. Why Israel is getting this question? Yeah, even on the Republican side. So I actually believe that our view, which is now the view of the mainstream Democratic candidates for presidency, you heard Rahm Emanuel, you heard Gavin Newsom you heard, you know, Pete Buttigieg, you heard many Josh Weinberg: including Republicans on the right. Yeah, yeah. Nadav Tamir: of them say the same thing. And I actually believe that that most Jews ⁓ believe that the best way to maintain the special relations is that the that the will be used for the purposes that it was given, which means security. And it will not be used for the Ben Gvir militias or for, you know, flattening Gaza so no Gazans could go back. And the same in Lebanon. I think it sense. It's just common sense. And it's not against Israel, it's for Israel. And we're very much for, for example, the coordination between the US and Israel ⁓ the tactical level or in R &D ⁓ ⁓ Dome and Arrow and things like that. But we don't think that ⁓ giving a blank check to ally to do whatever they want, even if it hurts your own interest as ⁓ the ⁓ makes Orly Erez Likhovski: Yeah, know, I'm listening carefully and I don't agree. First of all, I think that when you are sort of blaming the military aid increased anti-Semitism, I think it's ⁓ the victim ⁓ this ⁓ But I think that obviously the military aid from the US is a ⁓ strategic for Israel on which... everything is based and we have a high GDP, but we have a lot, as you know, a lot of challenges here in Israel and so many fronts. And I think a lot of American, including a lot of American Jews, like, I don't know if you have the numbers about how many American Jews are supporting this means, are understanding the very special situation of Israel that, you know, it's true, you know, what can we say? We are dealing... against very, very problematic enemies, right? We have Iran and we can talk about the war with Iran, but we have a country that wants to diminish the state of Israel on top of the earth, and we are dealing with those security issues. So I think, first of all, we have to talk, and you haven't spoken about the distinction between defensive and offensive weapons, which is, I think, dramatic. And also, if you're saying, okay, we're now going to deal with Israel as with any other country in the world, it has a lot of consequences that are very problematic, definitely on the short term, but also on the long term ⁓ well. I think we have to, one is to say, we are sanctioning settlers in the West Bank and people who are doing, who are unfortunately backed by the government who are doing terrible things. On the other hand, is stopping or conditioning or demanding. full payment ⁓ on the military that has been given for many, many years. Hopefully, you know, I think all of us are hoping that we will have a different government that will take us back to Israel as a really democratic and Jewish state. even as it is now, I think it carries dramatic implications for ⁓ security of Israel. Nadav Tamir: No, no, I completely disagree with you. First, in terms of the subsidizing of the procurement of weapons, it is not a J Street position. It is Heritage 2025. It is the Trump administration. It is Bibi that understand that it's just not sustainable and that Israel has to be not a client state, but a partner. Or in terms of we never ever spoke about stopping, you know, military helping Israel in terms of security. ever never listen I have my son there in Lebanon would I ever put him in risk in the positions that I support or the kibbutz where I grew up of course not we want to make sure that the aid is being used for the purposes that it's been given for example I do believe that Biden failed he was able to stop the war and release the hostages long time before he did it and eventually we needed Trump to do it because by that did not use the leverage of a superpower. I believe that it did not help Israel. I believe that Israel is served better when America is helping us with diplomacy and not with the giving us blank check in terms ⁓ of And ⁓ of we are for helping to secure Israel against Iran, against Hezbollah, against Hamas. But we are not for helping Israel to ⁓ treat ⁓ Gazans ⁓ in a way that no matter if it's Hamas or anyone else. And this is why Biden did the right thing when he told them that before you go to Rafah, three-ton don't serve you operationally. And they don't. I know it. I was there. I mean, I know how the war works. So we to separate those things. Nobody calls for stopping security assistance. We deeply about the security of Israel. We just want to make it smarter in a way that actually serves the purposes that Israel should move ⁓ And it's not just more weapons and it's a lot more diplomacy. This actually where America could really make a difference. And I'm not neglecting the security needs and I'm not a pacifist. I completely understand that we need a very strong military. But I believe that the way this kind of military aid became so holy, it was because people forgot that there's better ways to promote security for Israel. Josh Weinberg: Yeah, I think that's. really important and critical to say, can you just as a diplomat give a little bit of color to the recent headlines between Trump and Netanyahu? ⁓ especially with regarding Lebanon and Iran, Trump some ⁓ colorful shall we say, regarding Netanyahu. Is Netanyahu risking the security Israel in jeopardizing his relationship with the President of the United States. Nadav Tamir: Well, first of all, Netanyahu jeopardized his relations with every American president before Trump. Actually, with Trump, he has kind of a bromance, but it was quite clear that this bromance is going to stop soon as ⁓ Trump realize that Netanyahu was selling him those fantasies of total victory in Gaza, total victory in Iran. It's going to be just like Venezuela. And at some point, Trump will need to, you know, to put the on Netanyahu. But Netanyahu has no choice because he's entire career was putting all the money on the Republican Party. Trashing the bipartisan approach that was so critical for us as diplomats in the u.s And then he he told israelis. I have this amazing magic with trump. I made him move the embassy. I made him Leave the iran deal, which of course is the reason why iran now is now a threshold nuclear weapon state so netan has no choice and if trump tomorrow decides that he wants to Tell israel to stop ⁓ the war in in ⁓ or even to stop settler violence in the West Bank. He's the only one who could do it. He has a huge leverage. The right wingers in Israel think that Trump is the Messiah. And I do hope that he will use that leverage in a way that helps Israelis and Palestinians rather than just help ⁓ ⁓ instincts. Orly Erez Likhovski: Yeah, I think we should say, stress how Israel has really become so influenced by Trump that really it seems that they always completely gave up our sovereignty, right? I think it was like two weeks ago that every day we woke up and we said, okay, we have to see whether Trump wants to resume the war in Iran, that this is going to affect our lives because really Netanyahu ⁓ no say in the matter. And I think it's really unbelievable. ⁓ guess people who support Netanyahu would find a way to somehow take, ⁓ put this upside down and say, ⁓ you know, he's an amazing leader, but it's literally unbelievable. And it has never been the case that we were so dependent upon, you know, the ⁓ of the US president. But I want to ask you more, Nadav, about the bipartisan relationship by the, you know, toward Israel. You know, we used to say that we must keep the bipartisan support. Now it seems that we have bipartisan animosity. ⁓ toward Israel, right? By really both parties and it's just getting And Josh, alluded to what Trump has said. He said, everybody hates you. Everybody hates Israel now, right? Those are the words of the American president, from last So what is your on this? mean, going forward, how can we heal relationship between Israel and the two parties in America? Nadav Tamir: Well, as to the Republicans, I'm not sure because I don't know where the Republican party is going. The Republican party after Trump will be a very different party because right now Trump holds many kinds of different ideologies together. Yes, we have the evangelical Christians who actually want Armageddon just like Smotrich. And for them, you know, Israel doesn't have to be safe because if that's it needed to bring the Messiah back, that will be a war, that's fine. ⁓ You have you know, Christian white supremacists who actually that Israel is a great example how to use, how to deal with Islamists and and with Islam and with other people, which is also not the Israel that we want as liberal Israelis. And then you have the neo-cons who think that Israel is a good example for thinking that you can solve everything with military. And we saw the result of that in Iraq and Afghanistan and now in Iran. But then you have the MAGA, which I believe is actually going to be the main power in the Republican Party. And the MAGA are transactional. For them, the relations with Israel, it's not about values. They don't care ⁓ lead the democratic world. That's why they don't care about Ukraine. They don't care about Taiwan. For it's what can you give us? And I'm not sure... ⁓ Josh Weinberg: Sudan and others, yeah. Nadav Tamir: I'm not sure Israel could give them what could or what Turkey could. And that's this transactional relations are very dangerous. On the Democratic Party, I'm pretty optimistic that if Israel will be able to remain a liberal democracy and will pursue peace, ⁓ we could heal the We will still have some people on the extreme left who... don't understand our connection to the land. They think we're colonialists. They think we're privileged white people and that we can never be right. They don't believe that our power could be, that any power could be right. I think it's the minority. It's really the margin of the Democratic Party. The of the Democratic Party and where the candidates for the presidency will be and most members of Congress, is in this liberal Zionist space. And if we will be able to keep Israel in that space, I believe that we could definitely heal the relations. Josh Weinberg: Well, speaking of that, know, Nadav, and our time, I think is winding down slightly. But you may have, you know, gotten the email, we are looking at an election season, both in both in Israel midterm elections in the United States. Are you optimistic that change is possible? And ⁓ what are you what J Street hoping to see? Nadav Tamir: Well, first of all, I, you know, it differs between the two countries in the U.S. You're going to have a midterm elections. And I do believe that the Democrats are going to take over the House of Representatives as to the Senate. It's really neck to neck and depends on like. six and we don't know what's going to be the outcome, but I believe that Trump will have more limits on his decisions after the elections. In Israel, I'm optimistic that we could get rid of this awful ⁓ coalition. I believe that we have to be smarter in the opposition and one of the most important things is that we have to work with the Arab parties. For me, it's both moral and strategic that we have to do it. But I have to say that winning the elections is necessary, but it's not sufficient. Because we already had a government with Bennett and Lapid and Lieberman, and this government did many great things. They had so many more women in, you know, as ministers, and they had a climate change policy. Exactly. Exactly. Josh Weinberg: Just for our listeners, Nadav, you're referring to the change government of 21-22 that lasted about 18 months. And yeah, okay. Thank you. Yeah. Orly Erez Likhovski: Yeah. Yeah. Nadav Tamir: And it was the first government that dealt with awful crime, ⁓ organized crime in the Arab world. Orly Erez Likhovski: in the Arab world. Nadav Tamir: They had many good things that I could say about them, but on the Palestinian issue, they decided not to decide. And when you don't decide on the Palestinian issue, you actually give the power to the spoilers, whether to Hamas or to the to our messianics. that's it's not enough to win the elections. And we need a change in terms of the Palestinian issue. And when people ask me, do you think that Bennett and Lieberman could really You know, do something, I tell them, listen, I don't expect them to be... ⁓ Peres or Rabin who initiated Oslo. But I do expect them to be Menachem Begin, who was a hawk of all hawks and eventually gave up Sinai and dismantled the settlements in the Sinai for a peace with Egypt. did it happen? It happened because of American diplomacy. It was Kissinger first who turned Egypt from the Soviet orientation to the American, which allowed Carter to bring Sadat. and Begin to Camp David and one of the reasons why I work in J Street that I believe that American diplomacy could really help us solve this. Orly Erez Likhovski: And Nadav, it's really fascinating. And if we were going to see this change, could you say a word to sort of conclude about how is this going to affect the relationship between Israel and American Jewry? Nadav Tamir: Well, believe that it will help a lot because most American Jews look at the Smotrich-Ben Gvir phenomena as something that is completely against any Jewish value. you know, so upset by this. And I believe that Bennett, Lapid, Eisenkot, you know, they will all manage the relations in a much better way with the Jewish community and with the Democratic Party. But as I said, it's not enough. And for young Jews to stay in this place of love for Israel that their parents had, Israel has to stop the occupation. If the occupation persists, we will eventually lose the next generation of Jews. Orly Erez Likhovski: Nadav, thank you so much. Josh Weinberg: I thank you, Nadav, truly. And I this is just a small of a larger continual conversation that I hope we get to continue at some point. And I think you've made a lot of important points and there may be still points in which not everyone agrees or is on the same page. And that's okay. ⁓ We are a people of And I think that we both want what's best for for the North American Jewish community and for this relationship to continue to thrive and to grow. And we have a lot of work to do and a lot of concerns that still need to be addressed. So really thank you for taking the time to be with us ⁓ we deeply appreciate it. Nadav Tamir: Thank you for everything that you do and also Gilad Kariv who is my Rabbi in Givatayim who represents your values in the Knesset. I'm big admirer of his. Josh Weinberg: Yeah. Orly Erez Likhovski: So are we. So I just want to add that ⁓ we know that some of the questions that we've dealt with, especially around the military aid, are deeply sensitive, but this is exactly why it matters to have this conversation, because for us, the question is not only whether liberal Zionists agree with one another, because often we do not, but the deeper question is whether we can stay in a serious relationship while arguing about the future of Israel as a Jewish and democratic country. Nadav Tamir: you Orly Erez Likhovski: Conversations like this are exactly why we started this podcast. And this podcast exists because we believe Israel can be better for all who live here and for all who care about it from afar. But that takes honest conversation and it takes partnership. So if these conversations are important to you, please share this episode and help us keep this conversation going. Josh Weinberg: And to stay up to date, subscribe on YouTube or wherever you listen to podcasts. If you want to help us grow, make an engaging post on social media. Nadav Tamir: Thank you. Josh Weinberg: Leave a five-star review. Maybe something like, really appreciate this conversation with Nadav Tamir, Orly and Josh, although I left a bit confused and in the end, I'm not going to support any organization except for the reform movement, you know, its institutions in Israel. And, you know, something like that. And then please send this episode to someone who should be part of this conversation. Maybe even sponsor an episode. Great way to celebrate a birthday, anniversary, or maybe Yud Zayin B Tamuz That would be ⁓ We look forward to continuing this conversation. Orly Erez Likhovski: You Josh Weinberg: and thank you so much for listening. Orly Erez Likhovski: Thank you, bye bye.