Diplomats are meant to measure every word. Yet this week two of them threw caution aside. One did so in New Delhi, the other in Paris. Both sparked anger, though the responses could not have been more different.
India’s indulgence, France’s refusal
In New Delhi, Israel’s ambassador Reuven Azar abandoned restraint. Speaking before a friendly crowd, he targeted Priyanka Gandhi with open contempt. He declared that Israel had killed “25,000 Hamas terrorists” and dismissed the human cost. The hall cheered. Hindutva groups celebrated his attack as if it were a victory speech. It was not diplomacy. It was theatre, and it revealed how much space India’s ruling circles are ready to give Israel at this moment.
Paris saw another scene. Charles Kushner, the United States ambassador to France and father of Jared Kushner, sent a letter to President Emmanuel Macron accusing the government of failing to fight antisemitism. He then released the letter to the press. France reacted firmly. The foreign ministry summoned him and called his remarks “unacceptable.” Officials reminded Washington that this broke the very rules of international conduct. The message was clear. France will not tolerate lectures, even from America.
Two allies, two answers
The contrast is striking. India rewarded provocation with applause. France punished it with a rebuke. India’s ruling bloc views alignment with Israel as part of its nationalist pride. France defends its sovereignty as fiercely as it did in de Gaulle’s day. One allowed an envoy to sneer at its opposition leaders. The other told a superpower’s envoy to respect its institutions.
The strain behind the smiles
For the United States, Kushner’s words carry real cost. Transatlantic trust is already brittle. Europe is wary of Donald Trump’s return. Macron cannot afford to look weak before Washington, not when French Jews fear rising antisemitism and French Muslims fear suspicion. The rebuke showed that France will draw its own lines, even if Washington disapproves.
For Israel, Azar’s applause in Delhi may feel sweet but it is dangerous. By tying itself to India’s ruling ideology, Israel risks losing credibility with the wider Indian public. A diplomat who acts like a party functionary can win short-term cheers but lose long-term trust. If politics in India shifts, that loyalty may prove costly.
A fragile era of diplomacy
These two incidents tell us that diplomacy is no longer what it once was. Ambassadors are acting more like partisans than careful negotiators. Host nations must choose whether to indulge them or to assert their own dignity.
France chose to assert. India chose to indulge. Those choices reveal the kind of world being shaped in this conflict-driven age.
Perhaps the real danger is not that diplomats are reckless. It is that we are growing used to it.
Comments
Post a Comment