The two-to-tango adage seems applicable here

Hamas is not participating in this latest scramble for a ceasefire

Thanks for upgrading to a paid subscription. Writing is my job. Your support of that means everything to me.

A story today at Times of Israel, attributed to “agencies and TOI staff” is, per the headline, about US Secretary of State Antony Blinken returning to Israel for the ninth time since October 7. The first six paragraphs have to do with his plans to meet various Israeli leaders, as well as ongoing talks among parties in Doha and Cairo. Also the business about a bridge over persistent gaps in the effort to arrive at a ceasefire agreement.

All very interesting, but the real news in the story doesn’t come until the seventh paragraph:

But Hamas political bureau member Sami Abu Zuhri undercut the cautious optimism, telling AFP that signs of progress after two days of talks in Doha were “an illusion.”

“We are not facing a deal or real negotiations, but rather the imposing of American diktats,” he said.

Previous optimism during months of on-off truce talks has proven unfounded.

Notice the phrase I used above: “ongoing talks among parties.” Hamas is not of those parties. It is not even sending representatives to the current round.

And this is what makes the demonstrations by families of hostages that are now routine occurrences in Tel Aviv so heartstring-tugging. Yes, we all can barely stand to think about what their daily lives in the tunnels and cramped apartments of Gaza are like (an inkling of which we have based on the testimony of hostages already released).

But some of those demonstrators have to know this cold, hard fact: Hamas, like Iran and all of its proxies, has one aim: ending Israel’s existence and getting all Jews out of the Middle East.

This means that any arrangement that releases hostages - all the remaining, or some portion thereof - without Hamas being dismantled guarantees more October Sevenths.

The Biden-Blinken approach seems to be to once again tamp down presently flaring animosities long enough to get hostages back and resume conversation about a two-state solution.

We’re seeing in real time how unworkable that is.

What would a Harris-Walz approach look like?

We can start amassing clues from Harris’s selection of a Jewish-outreach liaison:

Ilan Goldenberg will serve in the position for Harris. Rather than liaising with the organized Jewish community, Goldenberg’s job, it seems, is to circumvent the practice of liaising with the Jewish community.

I’ll explain. The Jewish community in America is a wide and diverse cross-section of the tribe—“two Jews, three shuls” and all that. The closest thing we have to an umbrella representative is the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, which was created for this purpose and for several others. The CEO of the Conference of Presidents is William Daroff, an experienced hand within the Jewish organizational world who also has experience on the Hill. For the needs of a political campaign, you don’t have to hire a Jewish liaison, because we in the Jewish world have already done that for you. Just call Daroff—or whoever is in that position.

A White House liaison, on the other hand, is arguably necessary and certainly helpful. After all, a president has just gone through a campaign filled with partisanship and identity politics, and it never hurts to signal that the president is the president of everyone.

A campaign liaison does not play that role. Especially in a campaign like Harris’s, where Zoom rallies are organized based on skin color and gender and other markers of one’s biological demographic. The purpose of a campaign Jewish liaison in this situation is to rally the organized Jews already on Harris’s side and prepare them to defend her from any and all criticism no matter how legitimate. She is hiring a Jewish shield, not a Jewish liaison.

She might want to get a shield for the shield. Goldenberg is a puzzling choice. He is ideologically to the left of the current Democratic administration—of which Harris is vice president—which is a strange signal to send. He is also, more importantly, a man of poor judgment. He has made a very public show of his opposition to just about every move intended to help Israel over the past decade or so.

Goldenberg was against moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem in recognition of its Jewish significance or of Israeli sovereignty; he wanted, instead, for it to eventually be moved only when the Palestinians had lifted their veto and decided they had what they wanted. Speaking of Israeli sovereignty, he doesn’t like that the U.S. recognizes the Golan Heights in northern Israel. It is mighty strange to have a “Jewish liaison” who opposes Jewish sovereignty every time he’s asked.

In 2020, he was an adviser to the presidential campaign of Elizabeth Warren, one of Israel’s loudest and most ignorant critics in the Senate. He was a champion of the Iran nuclear deal, in which the Obama administration legitimized Iran’s drive for a bomb in return for Tehran delaying its nuclear breakout until after Obama was out of office.

There are other examples, but the key point is not that Goldenberg was wrong but how he was wrong. Moving the embassy would likely trigger a wave of regional violence, he predicted. (It didn’t.) Recognizing the Golan “damages Israeli security and undermines American interests in the Middle East and beyond, while stirring a hornet’s nest that didn’t need stirring,” he wrote. (It didn’t.) The Iran deal, he said, “will create a situation in which Iran will be deterred from ever pursuing a bomb.” (It didn’t.)

It seems as though Harris’s idea of a Jewish liaison is someone who will tell the Jewish community they’re wrong.

And she’s also already brought on a liaison to the Muslim community:

She has a slightly different idea of a liaison to the Arab/Muslim community (her campaign combines the two). Nasrina Bargzie, Harris’s choice for Arab/Muslim liaison, has worked for the vice president before. She also has a long record of defending the groups responsible for building up the anti-Semitism crisis on college campuses. One particular example stands out: In 2012, she and her coalition presented a report to the United Nations complaining about Jews on campus who objected to the anti-Semitic activism that has become so common.

The complaint went so far as to object to Jews having Title VI protections under civil-rights law—a debate that has come roaring back now that pro-Hamas encampments have been found to have unequivocally infringed on the basic rights of Jewish students. In other words, Harris’s Arab/Muslim liaison has spent years helping to bring the anti-Semitism crisis on campus to a boiling point.

And we have some pretty solid indication from Harris herself as to how she views Israel’s present predicament. One not need be particularly astute to assume Harris would not have very high regard for Israeli prime minister Netanyahu. But as Vice President, she’s president of the Senate, and is supposed to preside over state visits to Capitol Hill by foreign leaders. This is particularly to be expected in the case of a visit from the leader of one of America’s closest allies. Alas, she flew to Indianapolis that day to meet with the national leaders of a sorority - not even the sorority she belonged to in college. (There was, ahem, a certain kind of solidarity she was expressing by this trip. I assume you don’t need it spelled out for you.)

Well, okay, what can we glean about how a Very Stable Genius - J.D. Vance administration would handle the current Mideast juncture?

It would be a hot mess of incoherence.

And this time around, there would be no sane grownups around him to attempt to steer the ship responsibly.

Jut like with economics (can we please try the free market instead of either tariffs or price controls?) and energy (stop subsidizing play-like energy forms, and stop sucking up to Iowa farmers with pledges to protect ethanol), what ought to happen is plainly in front of us.

But we are so completely untethered from our inner compass we can’t acknowledge it.

And so more people will needlessly die, and the danger of an apocalyptic scenario looms ever larger.