What is important when considering the current Middle East conflict is understanding what kind of politician Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, who stands at the center of everything, truly is. The Middle East conflict could interconnect with Ukraine and Taiwan through the U.S. response. In other words, what Netanyahu thinks and how he makes decisions may directly impact future global affairs.

However, Israel is geographically distant from Japan, and its religion, culture, and complex history as a nomadic people are completely different from those of the Japanese as a settled people. It is extremely difficult for ordinary people in East Asia to understand the essential nature as a politician of Netanyahu, who continues to reign over Israeli politics while repeatedly walking on prison walls without falling inside.

In this context, an episode that could help Japanese people understand Netanyahu is the "shoe dessert incident" in the late Prime Minister Abe's Middle East diplomacy. This time, I will examine the "temperament (nature)" of politician Netanyahu, who stands at the center of the world's destiny, as seen through this incident (I dare call it an incident).

■What is the "shoe dessert incident"?
From April 29 to May 3, 2018, the late former Prime Minister Abe visited Middle Eastern countries. Prior to this, in December 2017, then-President Trump had recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital, making it a time when tensions in the Middle East had significantly increased.

According to Ministry of Foreign Affairs materials, during this Middle East tour, Abe first entered the Middle East through the United Arab Emirates, visited Jordan, and then landed at Israel's Ben Gurion Airport. He then "first" visited Palestinian President Abbas before meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu in Jerusalem.
 

Reference: Ministry of Foreign Affairs Public Relations　https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/me_a/me2/page3_002451.html

The incident occurred at the private dinner party hosted by Netanyahu at the end. At the conclusion of the meal, the "chocolate served in a shoe" dessert shown in the opening photo was presented. And under that shoe, a mat that appeared to imitate Japanese tatami was laid.

The cuisine of the day was reportedly prepared by a famous Israeli creative chef, and this was also part of that creativity with no deep meaning. When this photo was spread on social media and caused controversy, diplomatic authorities on both sides moved to extinguish the fire with such comments. At exactly this time, our company was also communicating with Israeli startups, and I remember discussing with members and related parties about the reasons why Netanyahu performed such an act that could be considered diplomatic discourtesy. Let me look back on some of that discussion.

■It is impossible that there was "no deep meaning."
First, the common understanding, including Israeli experts, was that it was impossible for this dessert to have "no intention." Our company is not a group of diplomatic experts, but we understand that meals between prime ministers, and all menus served there, should have important meaning. (This is often the case even in businessman's meals).

Meals contain the condensed history, culture, and customs of each other, and in diplomacy, some message is generally embedded there. Moreover, Israel is a country of Jewish people with strict dietary laws (kosher). Usually, they have sensitivity sensors working regarding what they put in their mouths that Japanese people cannot even imagine. Therefore, our common understanding from the discussion at that time was that the interpretation that this dessert had "no meaning" was impossible.

■What was Netanyahu's message embedded in the dessert?
So what kind of message from Netanyahu was embedded in this dessert? From a Japanese perspective, "stepping on tatami with shoes" is undoubtedly quite discourteous. It is impossible for Israeli professionals, who excel in intelligence and diplomacy, to be ignorant of this. Moreover, using shoes as dining utensils is not common in global dining customs. This dessert seems to contain Netanyahu's "anger" that he wanted to express despite being fully aware of the discourtesy. What was the source of that anger?

One possibility is the "order" of Middle East diplomacy at this time. After finishing his visit to Jordan and landing at Israel's Ben Gurion Airport, Abe first visited the Palestinian territories. The diplomatic order being after Palestine itself would have been unpleasant for Netanyahu. Also, using Israel's airport but going to Palestine first could be considered further discourtesy. (However, Gaza's international airport, built with international support including Japan, was destroyed by Israeli airstrikes fearing Hamas would use it, and Gaza has no airport to begin with).

Furthermore, Prime Minister Abe informed Israel at this time that Japan would not relocate its embassy to Jerusalem. Regarding Palestinian support, he provided an additional $10 million to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) and announced $10 million in support for Gaza's seawater desalination plant construction project.

From Netanyahu's standpoint, such diplomatic posture by Abe would have been perceived as pro-Palestinian. Furthermore, as is becoming clear in the current Middle East conflict, some of the Palestinian support funds and materials from various countries including Japan have flowed to the terrorist organization Hamas, heightening Israel's risks, which may not have been overlooked.

■What is the "temperament" of politician Netanyahu that should be read from this incident?
Our company cannot judge whether Abe's Middle East diplomacy at that time constituted "diplomatic discourtesy" equivalent to being served "dessert served in shoes placed on tatami." There are probably many nuances that only the parties involved can understand. Abe, who had high domestic approval ratings at the time and was gaining confidence, may have presented some bold off-the-record proposal to Netanyahu that touched his reverse scale. Ordinary people have no way of knowing the inner workings of high-level diplomatic negotiations. (Personally, I hope the former Prime Minister's wife, who was next to Abe as a party to this incident, will testify about what actually happened at that time).

However, the insight our company gained from this incident that ultimately occurred is that Netanyahu is probably a politician with a low boiling point for anger. And when anger reaches the boiling point, it immediately translates into action. And he does not seem to be the type to deeply consider what impact such actions might bring. He has probably demonstrated similar forms of communication to other parties as well.

Our company currently speculates that, unfortunately, Israel will aim for Hamas's complete destruction (though the definition of destruction is unclear) and will not hesitate to engage in two-front operations with Hezbollah encroaching from the north. Netanyahu probably believes he can only justify himself by carrying this out. The risk of further expansion of the Middle East conflict is unfortunately extremely high. Efforts must be made to avoid the worst-case scenario.