During a visit to Jerusalem, the former secretary of state discussed current U.S. foreign policy, his own experiences in the Reagan administration, and the breakdown of the Middle East. He also reflected on Israel’s current situation (“All things considered . . . it’s doing well”) and the hostility it faces (“I think it’s a lot of anti-Semitism”), and told the story of his own involvement in Israel’s transition to capitalism. (Interview by David Horovitz.)

When I was in office as secretary of state (1982-89), I had a lot of dealings with Israel. And early on I was called on by prime ministers and foreign ministers to talk about security issues. I said to them, “Are you watching your economy?” And nobody even wanted to talk about it. . . . So sometime in the mid-1980s: hyperinflation. Big trouble. They came to me, and they said, “Well, you said we should pay attention. What should we do now?”

I told them what I thought they should do. My great friend Milton Friedman was my unpaid consultant. We developed ideas. . . . Then we made a deal—the Israeli government, the American Jewish community, and the American Congress. They all agreed: I would be the heavy; I would be the guy who said all the tough things. The other side of the deal was [the Israeli government] would do what I said. . . . We brought about the softest landing from hyperinflation anywhere.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.