Israeli Ambassador Gideon Meir

You can find a video of the HPR’s conversation with Ambassador Meir here.
Ambassador Gideon Meir served for 45 years as an Israeli diplomat and most recently as the director general for public diplomacy at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Jerusalem. He served as the deputy director general for media and public Affairs during the second Infitada and the Second Lebanon War. He also participated in the negotiations team for the Egyptian Peace Treaty and joined the official delegation to Camp David in 1979.
Harvard Political Review: During the war in Gaza and Israel this summer, reports of Palestinian civilian deaths and destruction spread rapidly on social media. The #GazaUnderAttack was used millions of times on Twitter over the summer while the #IsraelUnderFire was used only a few hundred of thousand times. With your long professional experience in media and communication in the context of diplomacy, what do you think was the impact of social media on this summer’s war in Gaza and Israel?
Gideon Meir: I think social media became very important because it enables states and countries, like Israel, to bypass traditional media. At any given time, there are over 100 journalists in Israel, which is disproportionate to the size of Israel. We are 8 million inhabitants. We are the size of New Jersey, so there has to be an explanation for why there are so many journalists there. Now the journalists are not covering the state of Israel. They are covering the conflict. They’re covering it in a very much pro-Palestinian way and we saw it in the last war. There were no reports coming out from Gaza about how Hamas is using their own population in order to protect their rockets and missiles, whereas Israel was investing a lot of money in protecting its civilians.
I have in front of me a Hamas website which has instructions on how to use the civilian population and how to talk to the West vis-à-vis the social media. And how to tell the West that every Palestinian who was killed, whether he was armed or not, was an innocent civilian. They give instructions. It’s all on the web: one by one, how to use the social media and to lie to the world and tell the world a different story. For us, human rights and human civilian lives are the most important. We don’t use our civilians to protect our missiles. We use our missiles to protect the civilians, whereas on the Palestinian side they use their civilians to protect the missiles.
Only one or two journalists were courageous enough to report how Hamas used their missiles and rockets from a populated area. It was an Indian television station, which showed exactly what happened there. Most of the journalists there are not courageous. They don’t tell the truth of what happened in Gaza. In Gaza, unfortunately, there were also civilians who were killed, but in every war, civilians are killed because it’s a way and terrorist organizations don’t care about the life of the people. The Israeli army knocked on the roofs, they called the people to evacuate the places. We were sending leaflets from helicopters to tell the people, “Israel is going to attack this and this place. Please leave your home”. Hamas threatened the people, “Don’t leave your homes,” and didn’t care that Israel would kill them.
The reality is a different reality from what was reported in the traditional media and in the social media.
HPR: Is it not the job of the journalist to report what they see?
GM: No doubt the role of the journalist is to report what he sees, without commentary. Unfortunately, journalists are also giving their commentary.
HPR: Do you think that the tremendous focus on the humanitarian side of the story by mainstream media provided a distorted view of the conflict?
GM: There was an unbelievable humanitarian cost in Gaza. I don’t deny it, but you have to ask yourself why there was such a humanitarian problem. Because this is what Hamas wanted. They are using it as part of their propaganda. This is what Qatar wanted.  Qatar is celebrating because they can demonize and delegitimize the Jewish state and some of the journalists are playing with this game.
We talk about human rights. Israel is not a violator of human rights. Who accuses Israel of violating human rights? Qatar, Iran, and Syria: where human rights do not exist. I don’t see that that the Arab world or Europe is so concerned with what is going on in Syria. It’s called a double standard.
We have an army with very high values. We have instructions on when to open fire, how to target Palestinian rockets: most of the killing was done by targeting terrorists. What can we do when the terrorists are using their own civilians to protect their terrorists?
HPR: In a 2013 BBC poll of about 30,000 people around the world, Israel was ranked as the fourth-most disliked nation, right behind Iran, Pakistan, and North Korea. What do you think is the root of the unpopularity?
GM: The way the media reports on Israel. The demonization of Israel and the delegitimization of Israel. Using a double standard when it comes to the Israel and Palestinian conflict. Perpetuating the conflict more and more, making this conflict as though if this conflict would be solved, the problems of the world would be solved, ranging from Afghanistan to ISIS. Everything depends on Israel because the media portrays Israel this way, including a very important newspaper of this [U.S.] country,
HPR: A large part of your career has been focused on how Israel should be portrayed to the media and the public. You mentioned in an interview with the Jerusalem Post that Israel’s government does not see public diplomacy as a key component of national security, and so has not budgeted the funds needed for the purpose. Why do you think the government is unwilling to provide the support for these public diplomacy campaigns.
GM: If I may say so, I was critical to my government even when I served in the government. I believe that the Israeli government should see public diplomacy, PR, and media, as part of Israel’s national security. We don’t put enough money into running good campaigns for Israel. We have to do it more. We have to invest a lot of money in it, and unfortunately we don’t do it. In certain cases we are losing the PR battle, I admit, because we could do more.
HPR: You played an important role in creating the Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty in 1979 and joined the official delegation to Camp David. This treaty has been a linchpin of Middle East Stability, but recent upheavals in Egypt and the greater Arab world may be changing the status quo. How tenuous is the treaty right now?
GM: The treaty is a strategic treaty. Is it a very important treaty for both Egypt and Israel. This agreement was signed because Egypt had a very courageous leader, Anwar Sadat. He came to Israel and said, “no more wars.” Israelis loved him. And he had a courageous counterpart who was willing to go with him to sign the peace treaty. Because the two leaders were so courageous and both sides made major comprises, the peace treaty was important. It was a little fragile when the Muslim Brotherhood came to power in Egypt, but right now there’s a new government in Egypt, which wants to keep the peace treaty because they believe it’s important for them as much as it is important for us.
HPR: Israel faces many challenges including long-standing territorial disputes, terrorist threats posed by Hamas and Hezbollah, and Iran’s emerging nuclear capacity. What is it that worries you the most now? What is it that keeps you up at night?
GM: What keeps me up at night is that Palestinians are not willing to come to the negotiating table and talk to us about peace. If they really want to have peace, and if they really believe that the Israeli prime minister, Netanyahu, doesn’t want peace, the only way to show to the world that the one who doesn’t want peace is the Israeli Prime Minister is by coming to the negotiating table and maybe calling his bluff. And if he’s not bluffing, maybe we’ll have an agreement. The question is whether the Palestinian government really wants an agreement. I doubt it. I have a lot of criticism on my government to be fair, but the major actor here is Palestine. If they really wanted peace, they had opportunities to have peace. There was even a Clinton outline to have peace: 97 percent of territory back to Palestinians. They don’t want it. They want one state. They don’t want a two state solution. The Israeli leadership, which was very right wing, accepted the two state solution. I think this is the best solution for the Palestinian people, who deserve their own state, and for the people of Israel. Both peoples deserve peace, to have a good economy, a good life.
HPR: And what role should the United States play in fostering this agreement?
GM: I think the United States has to play a major role because America and Israel share the same values. America is our biggest ally. Without America we cannot survive. On one hand, America is assisting Israel with money and weapons because it’s an American interest to have a strong Israel in this part of the world, because a world without Israel would be a different world. We are the stronghold of democracy in this part of the world. We are the stronghold of freedom, culture and values that are important to the American and Israeli people. The relationship between America and Israel are extremely important to both countries. I suggest to the leadership in both countries to get the tones down, and even if they have disputes, to keep them in the family and not to wash the laundry out in public 
HPR: The Nov 24 deadline for the Iran nuclear agreement is quickly approaching. What do you think is going to happen on that day?
GM: I’m very concerned. I don’t know if they’re going to sign the agreement. I’m very concerned because I don’t believe the Iranians.
This interview has been edited and condensed.