Arthur Higgins is known as a mild-mannered bespectacled journalist who reports on local angling contests, sporting results, and parochial disputes between borough councils and war-like matrons in a laid-back town in north-eastern England. His earlier humorous scamming-the-scammers escapades brought him to the attention of the regional newspaper he now works for, and his imaginary dialogues concerning members of the British Royal family received wide recognition as top-class piercing satire and resulted in several invitations either to work for or at least contribute to such respected deliverers of current affairs as The Times, The Guardian, and the BBC. But Arthur values his peaceful existence in rural northern England, where he has the freedom to walk his 3-year-old energetic Border Collie, Snowflake (a nickname derogatorily assigned to Donald Trump but lovingly assigned to the dog), across the gentle slopes of the dales without fear of harmful interruption. Thus, Arthur remains in the shadows of journalism but underneath his nondescript appearance there beats an insatiable desire for social justice and a thirst to reveal loopholes and hidden agendas in the policies of those in power. To that end, he creates imaginary interviews with ‘limelight politicians’, as he calls them; those whose actions have caused them to feature frequently in the headlines of national newspapers and reputable social media websites.

Like many of us, Arthur has followed the ongoing war between the Israeli military under the political leadership of Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and the Hamas militants, some say terrorists, operating among the Palestinians in the area known as the Gaza Strip. Unlike many of us, however, Arthur has been making notes preparatory to his imaginary interview with PM Netanyahu and, yesterday, he put his interview together. Here it is, in its imaginary entirety.

An Imaginary Interview with Benjamin Netanyahu

Arthur Higgins
January 22nd, 2024

Official portrait of Israel’s 9th Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, February 2023
Avi Ohayon / Government Press Office of Israel, CC BY-SA 3.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0

Arthur Higgins (AH): Good morning, Prime Minister. Thank you for agreeing to this imaginary interview.

Benjamin Netanyahu (BN): Thank you for having me, Arthur.

AH: Let me dive straight in with my first question. On October 7^th last year, members of the Hamas militant group entered Israel illegally and committed horrific acts of barbarity on Israeli citizens that resulted in around 1,200 deaths, some preceded by rape and torture, and concluded with the taking of about 240 hostages. Your response, Mr Prime Minister, was immediate. ‘We [Israel] are at war,’ you said, and later, you added, ‘Every Hamas member is a dead man.’ And here we are, over three months later, still at war with an estimated 25,000 Palestinians dead, many of whom were non-militant men, women and children. Most of Gaza has been rendered uninhabitable through constant bombings. Well over half the population of two million Gazans are now classed as displaced and are living in appalling conditions in refugee camps, makeshift dwellings, tents, cars, schools and parks and clustered into a tiny area in the southern part of Gaza, lacking in food, water, sanitation, and health care; and with no end in sight. What do you say about all this, Mr Netanyahu?

BN: Arthur, I know all this to be true, but we had no choice but to retaliate in the way we did. Hamas has been launching rockets into Israel since 2001 and has the declared intention of destroying the state of Israel and establishing the Islamic state of Palestine in its place. They are bad people. They want to kill or subjugate the inhabitants of Israel. As I said, we had no choice but to send in the IDF [Israel Defence Forces].

AH: Sir, respectfully, there’s always a choice, but let me ask a fundamental question. Why do you think Hamas launched their deadly attack on October 7th? What was the objective of their attack?

BN: Good question. Maybe they just wanted to kill some of our citizens? Or maybe it was a revenge attack for what they considered to be the oppression of Palestinians living in Gaza? Or maybe it was a political move against Fateh in the West Bank or an attempt to establish superiority over the Palestinian Authority? Or maybe they thought that an attack would garner world sympathy for their cause? Who knows why Hamas committed the atrocity on October 7th? The fact is, they did, and we had no choice but to retaliate in the way we did.

AH: That’s my point. Has anyone in your government or among your legal system stopped and considered the fundamental reason for the attack and thus considered an alternative course of action that did not invoke violence on the scale subsequently carried out? Have we all forgotten the lessons of history?

BN: Not so. I am very aware of how the state of Israel was formed by David Ben-Gurion in 1948 and how, ever since then, we have struggled to survive as a nation. Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Syria and, to a lesser extent, Turkey have all been opposed to our existence and, in some cases, launched military attacks against us. Hamas and Hezbollah, backed by Iran, have been particularly active and, as we saw, this culminated in the October 7th massacre. We are fighting and will continue to fight for our right to live here, and we will do what is necessary to survive as a nation.

AH: I understand but, deep down, it’s all about land. Your government has said that the Gaza Strip and West Bank areas currently occupied by those who identify as Palestinians are areas of land rightfully owned, if I might use that term, by Israel and referred to by you as the Disputed Territories but by the United Nations as the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Hence, you view the Palestinians as intruders, whereas the Palestinians view you, the Israelis, as occupiers. Correct?

BN: Yes, but we have never agreed with the UN’s judgement. Our Biblical scholars have studied the Torah and concluded that Canaan, the land between the Mediterranean coast and the river Jordan, was given to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob by God as an everlasting agreement. Check Genesis 17.8. Canaan is now the land we call Israel, including Gaza and the West Bank, Jordan and the southern parts of Syria and Lebanon.

AH: Ah, the religious angle. Well, other passages in the Bible assign obedience and faithfulness conditions to this agreement. Check Moses’s words in Deuteronomy 28, for example. In Genesis 21:22-34, Abraham agreed to respect the rights and dignity of those who were neighbours (the Philistines in the south of Canaan) to what we now call Israel. I think getting into a religious justification for claiming the land occupied by Palestinians to be an integral part of the land given to you by God would lead us into theological semantics based on the assumption that God exists and that the words written down over 2,000 years ago by scribes and prophets should govern the way the world is organised today.

Let’s get back to objectives: yours and Hamas’. Earlier, I asked why you thought Hamas orchestrated the October 7th attack. You gave various reasons but missed one crucial reason – sheer frustration at the lack of progress toward a two-state solution. Recently, you have unequivocally stated that you do not support a two-state solution to the conflict between Israel and Palestine. To quote you, you said, ‘After Hamas is destroyed, Israel must retain security control over Gaza to ensure that Gaza will no longer pose a threat to Israel, a requirement that contradicts the demand for Palestinian sovereignty.’

Why, when your Zionist forefathers, Theodor Herzl and Baron Edmond de Rothschild notably, fought hard for the right of the Jewish people to create a homeland in Palestine, the ancient land of the Jews, do you not acknowledge the same right for those who lived there in 1948 when the Jewish state was created? Why, when Britain’s Foreign Secretary, Arthur Balfour, wrote in 1917, and here again I quote, ‘… that the British Government favours the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine … but that nothing should be done to prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.’ This statement is echoed in UN Resolution 181, issued in 1947, as part of redefining geographic boundaries following the end of World War 2 and the relinquishing of the British mandate over Palestine. UN 181, also known as a Partition Plan for Palestine, called for two independent states, one Jewish, the other Arab – that is, Israel and Palestine.

UN Resolution 181, Partition Plan for Palestine, 1947
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-54116567

Why, Mr Netanyahu, do you not see parallels between your right to live as a nation, and the right of the Palestinians to do the same?

BN: Primarily, security, Arthur. I don’t believe any Palestinian government would accept that the state of Israel has a right to exist and would always be seeking ways to eliminate us. Look at Hamas, Hezbollah, Fateh, the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian Liberation Organisation. Each organisation has stated on many occasions that they will resist Israel’s occupation of land they claim to belong to the Palestinians.

Further afield, Iran and other Middle-East Islamic countries have disagreed with our right to exist and issued all sorts of threats to replace us with an Islamic nation. The 2020 Abraham Accords, brokered by Donald Trump, set Israel on a path for recognition with Bahrain, UAE, Morocco and Sudan. However, I accept that the agreements were not accepted by the Palestinians, who claimed it was a betrayal of their cause …

AH (interrupting): … and by many other Arabic nations who claim it to be a violation of the 2002 Saudi-Arabian Arab Peace Initiative that said normalisation of relations with Israel should only happen after the state of Palestine was established…

BN (continuing): … to which we didn’t agree, but let’s move on.

Second, as we’ve discussed, we claim the land is ours by biblical decree. We have constantly rejected the alternative views presented by the British Government in 1917 and subsequently by various United Nations resolutions, including 181 in 1947.

Third, such is the volatility of the politics of the Middle-Eastern Arab states such as Iran, Syria and Lebanon that, pragmatically, any solution that produces a two-state result will always remain fragile and subject to sudden acts of hostility.

AH (musing aloud): One wonders how the Middle East would look today had Palestine established its state at the same time as Israel in 1948. But, to continue…

AH: So, Prime Minister, what you are saying is that no solution brings about peace and stability between your country and the rest of the Arab nations that surround you. You see a future where you will always be on your guard for hostile attacks. Your response to such attacks will always be based on ‘an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth’ as espoused in Leviticus 24:19-21, the third book of Moses, rather than ‘if you are slapped on the right cheek, turn the other cheek’ advocated by Jesus during his Sermon on the Mount?

BN: While I am Israel’s Prime Minister, yes.

AH: Can I ask you a personal question, Prime Minister?

BN: Yes.

Gaza 2024
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-54116567

AH: How do you feel about the plight of the two million Palestinians now barely surviving in the living hell that is the Gaza Strip? Humanitarian aid struggles to reach those in need. The hospitals are almost devoid of medical items to treat the sick, injured and seriously underfed people who seek their help. The long-term effects of malnutrition in young bodies will resonate for years. Most of Gaza is now unsuitable for human habitation, and as and when the war ends, it will take years, maybe decades, to repair the devastation caused by your bombs, and it is not clear even whether you will allow the Gaza Strip to be returned as an area fit for habitation. If you aim to control the overall security for an indefinite period after the war, what will happen to the Palestinians clustered in southern Gaza? Will you still class them as intruders in your land and invite neighbouring countries to accept them as refugees? Do you think Egypt will accept them? Or Lebanon? Or will the situation return to the fragile pre-7/10 status? How will the end of the war be recognised? When all members of Hamas are dead? If so, how will you know this? Hamas members are not identified by a distinctive uniform. They live among the populace. Also, do you think that by killing all members of Hamas, you will also have killed the ideology? How can you entertain that belief when the death of 25,000 Palestinian citizens will foster future generations of those bent on revenge driven by hatred? Do you want to be remembered for creating a legacy of hatred and revenge?

Then there are the more personal questions of your standing worldwide. Your actions have caused protest marches both for and against your policies. Non-Jewish people who were happy to co-exist with their Jewish neighbours are now awakened to what has happened in the last three months. Words like genocide and antisemitism are bandied about with little regard for their true meaning. World leaders who initially endorsed your attack on Gaza and who supported you by refusing to back a call for a ceasefire are now rethinking their support. South Africa is taking you to the International Court of Justice in The Hague, accusing you of genocide. The United Nations constantly calls for a ceasefire but is thwarted by powerful nation members, such as the USA, who veto the call. The Iran-backed Yemeni Houthis are creating massive instability in world trade through their attacks on shipping passing through the Red Sea because they believe, rightly or wrongly, that the vessels have links to Israel or are carrying cargo to Israeli ports. As you well know, as soon as money, trade and world economies are threatened, alliances waver and opinions change. Even Donald Trump, someone I believe you respect and class as a friend, has criticised the effects of your actions on the Abraham Accords, which, he believes, would have put an end to the hostility against Israel when implemented (a statement I disagree with) but otherwise has supported you saying that you should have taken a more rigid stance against Hamas and Iran; a sentiment denounced as dangerous by the White House, the United Nations, the European Union, and by individual leaders of many countries and organisations; even more so if Trump is re-elected to the White House later this year. We can disregard Joe Biden’s response. He’s the consummate politician anxious to offend no-one with inoffensive platitudes and vague statements.

Do you not think it’s time to withdraw your troops and rescue the remaining hostages, agree to negotiate based on an acceptance of a two-state solution, agree on a plan to restore the Gaza Strip to a place suitable for habitation, decide who should administer the Strip autonomously, and put an end to the horrific loss of life and destruction of infrastructure?

In so doing, you would rise above the parochial interests of those who make up your right-wing coalition government and become a statesman rather than a warlord. What say you, Mr Netanyahu?

BN: There’s a lot to think about here, Arthur. Am I concerned about how history will judge me? Should I have taken the October 7^th attack as a wake-up call and consulted more with my government and legal advisers rather than respond immediately with a military attack on Hamas? Should I have convened an emergency meeting of world leaders and deep thinkers and looked at all options before authorising the attack? I don’t know the answers to these types of retrospective questions, and it is not in my nature to turn the other cheek, as you put it. Violence begets violence in my book and, at the time, I could not see a peaceful option. My goals are to eliminate Hamas, prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and liberate the remaining 132 hostages still held by Hamas. When these three goals are achieved, I will authorise the cessation of the war with Gaza and consider what happens next. Until that time, I regard the plight of the people in Gaza to be self-inflicted by their governing body, Hamas. It was Hamas who called down the Israeli bombs, not us.

AH: Well, Mr Prime Minister, you have until the date of the next Israeli government election, October 27^th 2026, to achieve your three goals unless your government falls earlier, or Knesset extends your time in office, or external forces out of your control force a change of direction. I want to say I wish you luck or success, but those are not the right words. I would more like to see an immediate ceasefire, an end to the indiscriminate killing of civilians, a restoration of some semblance of peace both in Gaza and in Israel, and a willingness to compromise and enter into negotiations aimed at solving once-and-for-all the Israel-Arab conflict.

BN: I hear you, Arthur, but I can make no promises.

AH: I have no further comments or questions. Thank you for your time, Prime Minister.

–ooOoo–

Footnote: Authenticity and Disclaimer

Arthur Higgins is a fictitious character. I brought him into existence in 2006 when I began my engagement with various scammers who, somehow, had obtained my email address and were sending me emails inviting me to become party to a substantial cash transfer and thus receive a percentage of the money in return for a small fee to start the ball rolling. Known as the Advance Fee Fraud or Nigerian 419 scam, I decided it would be fun to create a new persona and reply to the scammers. In total, I engaged with seven scammers, creating Arthur’s sister Martha along the way, until I was tired of ‘scamming the scammers’ and, in 2007, I put Arthur and Martha in cold storage. You can read about their exploits in my 2014 ebook, Fingers to the Keyboard: 2000 – 2014.

One of the images of Arthur Higgins sent to some of the scammers in 2006

Regarding the background of the Israeli-Palestine conflict, I studied this topic while writing my 2012 book on religion, The Religion Business: Cashing in on God. The subject features heavily in an appendix to Chapter 8, Islam and Armageddon, but I used Microsoft’s Copilot chatbot to update my understanding of post-2012 developments. Regarding representing Benjamin Netanyahu’s views, I have relied heavily on Wikipedia’s extensive 17,000-word biography of Netanyahu plus, where possible, quoted him verbatim. Any significant errors in my understanding of how he might have responded to Arthur’s questions and comments are due to my misunderstanding. Arthur’s views are his!

(^_^)