What was the point of the gotcha question to Blinken?

Every reporter’s dream is to trap the person they’re interviewing, with that one “gotcha” question that forces them to concede something they would not ordinarily admit. And no one does it better than smarmy Thomas Friedman who knew precisely what to ask U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken just a few days ago at the World Economic Forum annual meeting in Davos Switzerland at a face-to-face encounter.

Exactly on cue, Friedman moved in for the kill when he posed the question: “Do Jewish lives matter more than Palestinian and Muslim and Christian lives, given the incredible asymmetry in [civilian] casualties in the Gaza War.” Predictably, also on cue, Blinken, without hesitation, replied, “No.” But he didn’t stop there. It gave him the opportunity to showcase his virtue-signaling by expressing the very deep pain he feels, each and every day, for the innocent people of Gaza who are suffering, as if that needed to be emphasized.

Apparently, it’s the only explanation – meaning that the gotcha question was not a trap, but, rather, a planned interjection, allowing the secretary of state to verbalize the obvious in a manner that no one would accuse him, as a Jew, of favoring Israel in any way. It’s a likely scenario, because a seasoned writer, such as Thomas Friedman, knows exactly how to journalistically injure whoever he pleases, but, in this case, he appears to be a willing participant in propping up Blinken to make sure that everyone knows that Gaza suffering is flooding his mind on a daily basis. 

But why even ask the question? Of course, it’s a familiar one that has been swirling around over the last few years and one that became associated with Black Lives Matter. In the attempt to align with the cause, and not be caught out of step with the ever-evolving societal demands, most well-known people were, at one point or another, asked, not only if black lives mattered, but if they mattered more. 

Not wanting to be called out as controversial, most chose to bend the knee and agree that they did matter more, to whoever asked, knowing that it was to their benefit to do so. 

In the case of Blinken, however, Friedman’s agenda was to make sure that the level playing field stayed level! After all, Israel should not have any advantage over the people who voted in a terrorist government to represent them and, who, on their behalf, executed a savage massacre! No! Each side is equally important, equally valued and equally valid to Friedman who wanted to assure everyone that Blinken fully agreed. 

The venue of where the question was asked is also curious, because it was a sure bet that the answer would not be obscured, given the immense reporting that goes on at this annual function, attended by all of the world’s elites who aspire to determine our future destiny as a people.

Blinken, who offered no comfort by saying, “What is to be done?” was unable to propose any solution to what he described as a “gut-wrenching” situation, because, at least, until now, Israel has not been given an ultimatum to immediately wrap things up or suffer major consequences from the U.S. But, that’s not Blinken’s call, and by answering as he did, he also got to make that clear to everyone. 

All he could offer was the small consolation that everything possible is being done in order to “make a difference.” This was followed by what he probably hoped would sound like a very measured and fair-minded tone, when he reminded everyone that, “Israel can’t allow for another attack like the one executed against it by Hamas,” referring to the October 7 massacre which killed 1,200 innocents in Israel. 

Knowing that 136 individuals still remain in captivity, helps to keep the press in check because if that wasn’t the case, no one would hesitate, for a second, to demand Israel’s complete exit from Gaza, whether or not the job has been completed.

So, what exactly did Friedman’s question accomplish other than getting Blinken to sound like the unbiased arbiter to the mother of all disputes? It may have been a precursor to the rest of the conversation which always tries to arrive at the same place – trying to find a long-term resolution for how Israelis and Palestinians can co-exist together as neighbors. 

The problem, however, is that Friedman mistakenly addressed his gotcha question to the wrong person, because Blinken, rather than verbally bending the knee, should have, instead, replied, “That’s a question you really need to ask of Hamas, because the events of October 7, clearly attest to their unwavering belief that Palestinian lives are worth more than Jewish lives. So, until they are able to come to the conclusion that all lives matter equally, it doesn’t really matter what I think, because I’m not the one who is murdering anyone.”

Such a response would have put an end to Friedman’s attempt to either vilify the “wrong” answer or facilitate Blinken in his desire to be seen as a sympathetic and caring figure, who hasn’t abandoned the Palestinian cause but, rather, spends many sleepless hours trying to come up with a workable solution which no one has yet figured out.

Either way, the question was neither helpful nor revealing, because both were what can be expected of a reporter who sees himself as the smartest guy in the room and a secretary of state who is doing the bidding of his administration, much of whose base only sees the suffering of one side.

The truth of the matter is that until Hamas and the Palestinian people are painted into a corner and asked where they stand when it comes to whether or not Jewish lives are valued by them, whether or not the State of Israel has a right to exist and whether or not they will ever be willing to abandon their hatred long enough to have a go at living a decent life, then time is just being wasted by asking the wrong person whose answer won’t make one bit of difference!

In fact, that question should be asked of any would-be successor to Hamas, because if anyone who aspires to Palestinian leadership cannot categorically state that all Middle-East lives matter – be they Jewish or Arab, then they should not only be rejected by the world’s leaders, at large, but also by the Palestinian people, whose lives will only matter when their leaders are people who value them as much as their own lives. Because, as things stand now, the only lives that matter to the Hamas leaders are their own!