The six most important world powers, led by the United States, signed an interim agreement with Iran on Nov. 24 that restricts the progress of its nuclear program in exchange for relaxation of the economic sanctions against it. Soon talks for a permanent agreement will get underway. While it is clear to all parties involved that the negotiations will not be easy, the current decision is to talk — not to attack. Now everyone is giving diplomacy a chance. That was also what was done with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and the use of chemical weapons in Syria. You can argue about the effectiveness of this approach and view it as a sign of weakness or hesitation of the West in general and of the Obama administration in particular. But on the other hand, one has to recognize that it is a fact that needs to be addressed: The United States made a fundamental decision to completely exhaust all diplomatic avenues available and let threats of attack fall by the wayside. Regretfully, it would seem that the choice of the West to engage in talks left Israeli diplomats speechless.

In recent years, the Israeli Foreign Ministry has seen its status erode. Israeli ambassadors and consuls around the world have long been infuriated by the instructions they receive from the political echelon in Jerusalem. As public servants, however, they are forbidden from expressing their positions. On rare occasions, one of them dares to write a polite and well-reasoned diplomatic position paper, but it is doubtful that those running the ministry, including the old-new Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, grant it any importance or great influence, if any at all. 

In the days when President Shimon Peres was foreign minister and Yossi Beilin was his deputy, the Israeli Foreign Ministry blossomed and was at its peak. Those were the days of negotiations leading to the Oslo Accord. Those leading the talks and Israeli public diplomacy were the Foreign Ministry staff and other diplomats who were trained and casted specifically for this job, much like actors in an important theater production. The emissaries of the Israeli government were professionals, who understood the world and the international politics and media arenas. They were familiar with the mentality and public opinion in each of the countries they worked in.

A lot of water has flowed under the bridge since then. Slowly but surely, the status of the ministry began eroding, and it hit rock bottom during Liberman’s tenure as foreign minister. Liberman has a tendency to mock the heads of other countries. He truly despises Catherine Ashton, high representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and sees her as an enemy of Israel. But even more important, Liberman does not respect the professionals in the ministry he heads. He views many of them as spineless people, who do not understand the Jewish state’s security needs. He does not believe in their approach, in their determination, and naturally does not believe that they need to stand at the forefront of the international arena and represent Israel as they see it: a country that also knows how to speak the language of diplomacy — not only belligerence — and tries to feel the pulse of the players on the global scene and deal with it.