An unfair Israeli criticism of Ireland

Simon Harris was the target of staunch criticism by the Government of Israel yesterday, in the latest evidence of just how far relationships between the two countries have deteriorated. This time, however, the Israeli criticism is unambiguously unfair, and needlessly provocative.

Harris, the Israelis allege, did not mention in his first speech as Taoiseach the plight of the 133 hostages – most of them Israeli, but also including some Americans – who are, in the words of the Israeli foreign ministry, still “rotting in Hamas tunnels”. This, the Ministry added, came “After the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust”, going on to say that “there are those in Ireland who persist on being on the wrong side of history.”

As one of the very few relatively sympathetic to Israel’s cause writers in the Irish media sphere, this criticism is deeply unfair, and besides untrue. Indeed, in his very first speech as Fine Gael leader, just last Saturday, which was nationally televised, Harris said the following: “We condemn the massacre carried out by Hamas in October and again call for the release of all hostages.”

Indeed, the Irish Government, while being overtly hostile to Israel’s military operations in Gaza, and arguably overly sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, has been consistent in calling for the release of hostages by Hamas since October 7^th, and has never wavered in that position, despite very many on the Irish opposition benches for whom the release of hostages has often appeared to be a secondary priority, if indeed a priority at all.

The Israeli criticism, in this instance, will feel to many Irish people – understandably – as petty, hostile, and needlessly argumentative. It is unlikely to help their cause in this country.

Indeed, it is a misfire for another reason: Namely that there are many fair and legitimate criticisms of the Irish Government which Tel Aviv could offer. For example, it is a simple statement of fact that negotiations over a ceasefire in Gaza have not concluded because it is Hamas, not Israel, that is repeatedly unwilling to agree to such a cessation. As the Irish Independent reported as recently as Tuesday:

“ The latest comes after Hamas rejected an Israeli ceasefire proposal made at talks in Cairo, a senior Hamas official said yesterday.

Israel and Hamas sent teams to Egypt on Sunday for talks that included Qatari and Egyptian mediators as well as CIA Director William Burns.

Burn’s presence underlined rising pressure from Israel’s main ally, the US, for a deal that would free Israeli hostages held in Gaza and get aid to Palestinian civilians left des titute by six months of conflict. But senior Hamas official Ali Baraka said: “We reject the latest Israeli proposals that the Egyptian side informed us of. The politburo met today and decided this.”

Ah, the Hamas Politburo – reliably putting the interests of Gazans first, as ever.

Nevertheless, the Israelis can fairly ask, I think, why it is that the Irish Government is making so many public demands for Israel to agree a ceasefire, when it is a matter of record – on the record, indeed, from Hamas themselves – that it is the other side in the conflict that is refusing to agree. No matter how many times Hamas refuses a ceasefire, it seems, the Irish Government is unwilling to blame anyone other than the Israelis. Just as Israel is being deeply unfair to Simon Harris over his speech, so too is Irish foreign policy deeply unfair to Israel on this point, and many others.

Indeed, the Israelis might also point out that though Ireland has called for the hostages to be released, it does not accept the release of the hostages as a necessary element of a ceasefire. It is the public position of the Irish Government that there should be an unconditional and permanent ceasefire: That is to say, while Ireland might prefer the hostages to be released, it would be perfectly content for them to remain hostages if that was the price of peace. The Israelis might also point out that for all that Ireland likes to compare the middle east (absurdly) to Northern Ireland, the Irish Government made sure to negotiate the release of IRA prisoners as part of the Good Friday Agreement. Releasing prisoners as part of a peace deal, they could note, is good enough for the IRA but not apparently good enough for Israeli citizens.

Finally, the Irish Government can fairly be accused of utter hypocrisy on that above point, as it relates to hostages: The Israelis might note (and indeed, many of them do note, with understandable bitterness) that Ireland’s commitment to securing the release of hostages was much more urgent when an Irish citizen, nine year old Emily Hand, was held by Hamas for several months. Indeed, while that was the case, there were intense Irish diplomatic efforts to secure her release – something the Irish Government took credit for at the time.

Where, the Israelis might ask, is the Irish diplomatic effort to convince Hamas to release the other hostages? It reeks of Irish exceptionalism – that our hostages must be released but Israelis can, as their foreign ministry colourfully says, “rot”.

Add these things together, and you might get a sense of the reasons for Israeli anger and hostility towards Ireland, even before one considers the vexed – but ultimately probably irrelevant – question of “recognition of a Palestinian state”. (On that note, I note no intrepid journalist has bothered to ask Micheál Martin whom Ireland intends to recognise as the legitimate Government of a Palestinian State, presumably on the basis that such awkward questions might alienate the very angry Palestinian flag brigade on twitter).

But Israeli anger towards Ireland, however legitimate the Israelis might feel it is, is not helpfully expressed by an unfair and needlessly aggressive condemnation of Harris that is substantially untrue. There are substantive points Israel can make about Ireland’s conduct – points that might even cause Irish politicians to stop and think, if they get really lucky. This, I’m afraid, was not one of them.