Spring Break
Rethinking current conflicts in the Middle East
Consul General of Israel Nadav Tamir and the path to peace
by Michael Newborn
Features | 2/24/09
Posted online at 3:21 AM EST on 2/24/09
Nadav Tamir is consul general of Israel to New England. An expert in Israeli-U.S. relations, Tamir joined the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1993. He has since held a variety of positions within the Israeli government, including policy assistant to the foreign minister and political officer at the Embassy of Israel in Washington, D.C. In 2001, Tamir was appointed to his current position as advisor to the director general the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Jerusalem. JustFeatures spoke with Tamir over the telephone about the recent struggle between Israel and Hamas.
JustFeatures: What is your perspective on the recent clash between Israel and Hamas?
Nadav Tamir: It is too early to evaluate, and it depends on what will happen from here on. If we can secure our goals-that is, a durable and sustainable cease-fire-then I think it can be a good starting point for the efforts President Obama is now trying to promote toward negotiations for a two-state solution. This has to mean ensuring that Hamas won't fire rockets on the southern cities of Israel but also that there will be a mechanism to stop the smuggling of weapons from Iran through Egypt to Gaza. Also, we need to be able to open passages to Gaza without Hamas manipulating them. If we fail, this is a message that the extremist Iran and its proxies-Hamas and Hezbollah-are winning, which is a devastating message for all.
JF: Are you happy with the outcome?
NT: I do not think anyone can be happy when so many lives have been lost. We are deeply saddened by the loss of civilian life on both sides. Hopefully, there is now a greater sense of urgency from the international community to make sure that weapons are no longer smuggled into Gaza, which will help us achieve a more favorable outcome.
JF: Do you think the tactics employed by each side were appropriate?
NT: No. Hamas' tactics of trying to achieve their goals by killing civilians are counterproductive. The Palestinians will never achieve their deserved right to self-determination by acts of terrorism. We knew responding would be very ugly because Hamas was holding the Palestinian civilians hostage and using them as human shields. Unfortunately, Israel was put into an unbearable situation in which it had to choose between two equally horrifying options. Any government would agree that to protect its citizens from harm has to be its first priority. We had to choose between not responding, which would make life in Israel unbearable for its citizens, or responding. We hoped that by responding, we would be able to stop the rockets from being fired into Israel and create a sustainable cease-fire to improve the lives of both the Israelis and the Palestinian civilians in Gaza.
JustFeatures: What is your perspective on the recent clash between Israel and Hamas?
Nadav Tamir: It is too early to evaluate, and it depends on what will happen from here on. If we can secure our goals-that is, a durable and sustainable cease-fire-then I think it can be a good starting point for the efforts President Obama is now trying to promote toward negotiations for a two-state solution. This has to mean ensuring that Hamas won't fire rockets on the southern cities of Israel but also that there will be a mechanism to stop the smuggling of weapons from Iran through Egypt to Gaza. Also, we need to be able to open passages to Gaza without Hamas manipulating them. If we fail, this is a message that the extremist Iran and its proxies-Hamas and Hezbollah-are winning, which is a devastating message for all.
JF: Are you happy with the outcome?
NT: I do not think anyone can be happy when so many lives have been lost. We are deeply saddened by the loss of civilian life on both sides. Hopefully, there is now a greater sense of urgency from the international community to make sure that weapons are no longer smuggled into Gaza, which will help us achieve a more favorable outcome.
JF: Do you think the tactics employed by each side were appropriate?
NT: No. Hamas' tactics of trying to achieve their goals by killing civilians are counterproductive. The Palestinians will never achieve their deserved right to self-determination by acts of terrorism. We knew responding would be very ugly because Hamas was holding the Palestinian civilians hostage and using them as human shields. Unfortunately, Israel was put into an unbearable situation in which it had to choose between two equally horrifying options. Any government would agree that to protect its citizens from harm has to be its first priority. We had to choose between not responding, which would make life in Israel unbearable for its citizens, or responding. We hoped that by responding, we would be able to stop the rockets from being fired into Israel and create a sustainable cease-fire to improve the lives of both the Israelis and the Palestinian civilians in Gaza.
Be the first to comment on this story