Shai Bazak was close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in his first term and spent thousands of hours in his presence. A quarter of a century has passed since they parted ways, and Bazak, a media consultant, explains how he stopped understanding what was going on with his former boss and explains why we cannot get along without the United States.
Netanyahu visited at least 25 countries in his first term, which, at 47, made him the youngest Prime Minister elected in Israel and the first to be born there after the establishment of the state.
“Netanyahu and I would start talking about the Palestinians,” Bazak recalled. “And the presidents and heads of government would nod their heads politely as if they were interested. We talked about our problems, they talked about their problems, of course also about economic matters, which is always easier, and then towards the end of the meeting, the head of state would lower his voice for a moment and say to Netanyahu, ‘Say, can you use your influence in America to promote this or that for the benefit of my country?’.
This was repeated almost every time and expressed the power of the Israeli Prime Minister who has an open line to the American president, his administration and the strong Jewish community there who supports him,” he continued.”
Since then, 27 years have passed. Netanyahu has aged, and Bazak is no longer a child. Similarly, the warm relationship between Israel and the United States, which has had its ups and downs, has recently faced challenges. While Netanyahu stepped down from the position of Prime Minister to the head of the opposition and back again, Bazak took a diplomatic path and landed in the warm embrace as the Consul of Israel in the United States. Once as general consul in Florida and Puerto Rico, and another time as general consul of Israel in Boston.
It seems that there is no expert better than him on the complex relationship between Netanyahu and Biden. “In recent years, the United States has been going through a very negative process, which can be paralleled to what is happening in Israel,” he characterized with concern. “Like here, there too, the leadership and the public are drawn to extremism. This greatly weakens the United States, and this is a very big problem for us as well.
When Trump ran against Biden, people in Israel said, ‘We prefer the Republicans, because Trump is a true friend of Israel,’ and I said, ‘Biden is preferable, because Trump weakens the United States, and if it is weak, Israel is weak too.” People don’t understand that America is a lot more than a wonderful friend, it is our wall of defense. In practice, we have the IDF and the United States, and these two factors keep us from falling into the abyss.'”
Even now, despite the disagreements surrounding the war in Gaza and the day after?
“Now less. Bipartisan support for Israel on both sides of Congress has weakened both because of the growing extremism in the United States and because of our failure to act wisely. Until recently, despite the disagreements, Israel had consensus. A member of Congress who was against Israel had almost no chance of being elected because of the immense power of the Jewish community, which is very dominant in the business world and very politically involved.
The presence of Jews in the Senate and the House of Representatives is much larger in relation to their share of the population, and the Jews also contributed a significant part of the money needed to finance campaigns for presidency and for the Senate. However, recently the internal discord has permeated everywhere, both among us and with them , and the official discourse, even under the influence of social media, has become fragmented.
Trump wakes up in the morning and sends his thoughts to 60 million people, cursing, scolding, getting angry, and then extremists on the left and right wake up. A discourse of identities has opened up, and the public in the United States, just like in Israel, had to place itself within it. And this is how it developed, with the relaxed seventh generation in the richest country in the world, there is a need for ideology, perhaps also a little out of boredom, which quickly turned into a fight against post-colonialism.
The Americans looked at the African-Americans and the lower classes with crime and discrimination, and drew parallels to the Palestinians. They said, ‘Those who are weak and poor and oppressed need our help, and therefore just as we are for the Blacks and Muslims, we are also for the Palestinians, because Israel is the powerful and they are the oppressed.
It’s a tightrope walk, because I’ve always said, ‘I’d rather be strong and have my children be strong, and have a country rather than not having a country and being pitied because I’m persecuted, like in the Holocaust. But precisely because you’re strong, you’re expected to treat the weak well, regardless of whether he, in this case, wants to destroy you. It has reached such absurd places that in the current war, despite the terrible massacre that no one can deny because it was documented from every possible angle by its perpetrators, we were told, ‘It is because of you Jews and Israelis, and because we have to choose a side in the Middle East, the Palestinians are weak, so we support them.’”
Explaining the ideology of the pro-Palestine protesters
How does post-colonialist ideology become support for genocide?
“Those who support Gaza are the younger generation, who also support the LGBTQ+ community and women’s rights, but they do not understand that members of the community cannot live in Palestinian society, which condemns and persecutes them, and that women’s rights in Gaza are regularly trampled upon.”
And it represents Americans as a nation?
“No. The younger generation in the age group between 16 and 29 does not like us and sympathizes with the Palestinian narrative. Just three weeks ago, following a comprehensive survey, it was revealed that 30% of young people in the United States support Bin Laden, who carried out a horrific terrorist attack in their home. They understand him and his motives and think that his goals were justified. We need to understand that the youth in the United States are not wise not only towards us, but also towards themselves.”
These young people will become the next leaders in the future.
“True, but the surveys also show that as this age group grows older, it becomes more discerning, wiser, understands the map better, and then the support for bin Laden and the Palestinians will fade and they will change their minds. Therefore, even though there has been antisemitism in the United States since the outbreak of the war and a sense of renouncing Israel, we don’t need to exacerbate the problem. As of today, the United States still stands by us and the support for Bin Laden and the Palestinians is only the framework of the extremist voices. There is significant support for Israel, much more than for the Palestinians. Not only in numbers in the administration and in Congress, but also in the scientific public opinion polls; Israel is in a very good position in American society.”
Despite the stormy demonstrations in the streets and campuses?
“Yes, there are celebrities who echo antisemitic messages out of ignorance or because of identity politics, but neither they nor the demonstrations are a measure of public opinion. The scientific surveys clearly indicate support for Israel, particularly against Hamas. The very fact that President Biden supports Israel despite the heavy political price, is the best proof. We need to thank him every day, because he takes on a huge risk. Although among his voters, there is more support for Israel than disdain, the problem lies in the extremes. In a political system that is so polarized, and where elections in the United States are sometimes so close, when the extreme left says to Biden, ‘I will not vote for you because of your support for Israel, and the African-Americans also join, he is in trouble.”
Then a populist orchestra also arrives from Israel, and ministers and Knesset members say to send the Americans to hell.
“This is very unwise behavior, and it’s not just them. Even some of the public does not understand that if today we are struggling under the burden of sanctions, if economic measures are taken against Israel, the price of cottage cheese will be doubled or even tripled. People who say, ‘Who needs the Americans, we can manage very well without them,’ do not understand at all the meaning of the alliance with the United States, even from the practical standpoint. The support of the United States since the beginning of the war is almost incomprehensible.
They send us hundreds of airplanes full of ammunition and spare parts. They put all the weight of their influence on the heads of the countries that are hostile to Israel, they exercise their right of veto in the UN and prevent other countries from attacking us. Those who say, ‘We are strong, we will show the Americans who decide on crucial issues in the Middle East,’ simply do not know what they are talking about.
Without the United States, our military power, to put it carefully, would be infinitely smaller. it’s not just ammunition, developments, intelligence and critical collaborations. It is also standing by our side in international processes. For example, in the current crisis at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the discussions there have significance, but from a practical point of view, the court’s ability to impose sanctions on Israel depends on the UN Security Council. The five largest countries on the council have veto power. One of them is the United States, and if other countries tried to impose sanctions, the discussion would end. As Anatoli says in the ‘Godfather’, thank you very much, Shabbat Shalom.”
For four years, from ’94 to ’98, Shai Bazak was Netanyahu’s legendary media advisor. Before that, he was expelled from Yamit with his family, and got stuck in the big city. Since he didn’t have a penny in his pocket, he worked wherever he got the chance. “I cleaned stairwells, arranged wine bottles, made deliveries in the middle of the night on an old motorcycle, helped photograph weddings in Bnei Brak, taught some gun shooting, and sold stuff in a store,” he smiles. “Then a neighbor came and said he worked at ‘Moladet’ as a communications advisor and suggested that I join. That’s how I entered the political system, I was the spokesman for the Moetzet Yesha (Council of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza), and I met Netanyahu in the Rabin and Peres governments, when he was the head of the opposition.”
Bazak’s relationship with Netanyahu
How was your relationship?
“An excellent relationship. I gave him advice on every subject I knew, and he accepted most of it. I would arrive early in the morning and finish late at night. We worked every day, all day. After Rabin’s assassination and the elections, he became the Prime Minister, and at the age of 28 I became the Prime Minister’s spokesman. This doubled and tripled the scope of the work but it did not change the trust between us. It was a very challenging period. Very intense. Very difficult. To this day I take medication because of the stress I was under during those years. Back then, the stress triggered extreme blood pressure and never returned to normal, even to this day.
It was like a four month bootcamp in four years. But it was also captivating and fascinating. Every morning we would meet and discuss the issues on the agenda, and move forward according to them. Bibi was a very intelligent person, very knowledgeable, very articulate, with an impressive political and diplomatic understanding. He very much emphasized, at the time, that he is a democrat and what is important to him is the resilience of democracy.”
The opponents of the legal reform claim that it destroys democracy.
“I grew up in a right-wing household, with a knitted kippah, a naval education, and throughout the years, we also had some criticism of the legal system and the prosecution. As right-wing individuals who believed in Judea and Samaria and the security of Israel, we found it challenging to accept the decisions of the Supreme Court.”
Criticism of the legal system is not the reform that transformed the country.
“I was surprised. We said, okay, a full right-wing government in control, but much more could have been done for the sake of the security ideology and for the settlements but in a different way. The way this government was established and immediately afterwards behaved, meant that if the previous government of Bennett and Lapid wanted to build settlements In Judea and Samaria, it is reasonable to believe that it would have succeeded. But if the current government wanted to move a tree from one side to the other, it would have encountered resistance, because it was constantly dealing with this story of the reform.”
What happened to the Netanyahu you knew?
“He has changed. The political circumstances have also changed. I have trouble understanding him and his moves. I didn’t think his government took the right steps in this story, not even for the ideology of the right. I didn’t think it was right for him personally either. I was disappointed. I can only explain people when they behave according to what is right for them. But how can you explain a person who does not behave as is right for him? We had a good time together, but I have criticism of him, and I have not voted for him for many years.
I am not one of his prominent supporters. I have respect for the way we went together, so I try not to speak out against him or give him advice. I just think that in all the last years, things could have been done differently and then both he and the country would have been in a different place. But the choices are his and his responsibility.”
Why do you think he refuses to take responsibility for the October 7 default?
“The fact that he doesn’t take responsibility is unwise, from his point of view. It’s not only a moral issue, it’s also politically incorrect, because the worst way for a politician is eventually to do something that he was forced to do, and then he’ll both eat the fish and be expelled from the city. Not smart.”
If you were his communications advisor today, would you advise him to act differently?
“Many years have passed, I was different, he was different, the country was different. I appreciate that the considerations are also political matters. I have a hard time explaining it. Netanyahu is an intelligent person, and I would expect him to make wise decisions. Along the way, some of the circumstances that led the country to the coalition also led to a series of decisions that were not optimal for him. In my opinion, it is wrong for him not to take responsibility. It would have been better to demonstrate leadership, to stand up and say things clearly.”
It’s not just the Prime Minister, the people he appointed as senior ministers are also being severely criticized for the way he has been and especially for his statements.
“My father was the secretary of the finance committee in the Knesset. He was a very humble man, who died of cancer at a young age, but left his mark on all the Knesset employees. When I arrived at the political arena myself, the veteran officers would ask me, are you the son of Shmuel Bazak? When I was a child, He would take me to work with him and he always came to the Knesset with a suit, a tie and a hat. I once asked him, why are you so fancy, and he, who worked with Ben-Gurion, Sapir and Eshkol, told me, ‘Ben-Gurion can afford to go with an open collar, I’m not important enough to come to work in a robe.’ Although he wasn’t an MK, he made sure to dress respectably and speak politely.
Even in his time there were less prominent members of the Knesset, in England they are called ‘backbenchers’, but the majority were serious people, and the parties made an effort to choose and highlight them. Today, unfortunately, so many backbenchers have entered that it is no longer possible to ignore and say, ‘It’s nonsense, he came here by mistake, he will no longer be in the next Knesset. A lot of Knesset members are not knowledgeable, and low politics take control of them and the only thing that interests them is sympathy on social media. They follow the extremist elements that resonate with them and are less interested in the welfare of the public that elected them.”
Maybe this is the election system?
“In the past, voting for a party was not based on who was at its head. The party had meaning, branches, activity, the members of the Knesset were the top of the pyramid and elected them so that more people would vote for the party. But in recent years, something else happened in Likud. The system overtook the system. People said, ‘We want to influence the government through members of the center, let’s bring in huge amounts of them so that they will elect us.’ Then trading groups began, each group was told who to elect, and that’s how it evolved into what is happening today in Likud.
People are chosen according to group trading, and the generation diminishes, and then they become members of the Knesset. With the position comes responsibility, but it is difficult to translate it into success when there are more and more extremist elements who not only lack understanding in international relations and its dramatic implications, but also operate with an ideology that I think is wrong. It doesn’t matter how important the goal is from the perspective of the Land of Israel, but the way you express it, the behavior, the language, that ultimately affects the results.”
Impact of the statements of the government in the war
How do the statements of politicians, not only from the Likud, but also from religious Zionism and Jewish power, affect the war?
“The current government has an ideology that it wants to fulfill. Wise words are heard calmly, and when Major-General Giora Island talks about the fact that aid should not be provided to the citizens of Gaza until the abductees are seen at home, we all say, wait, we should seriously consider what he said because he is not extreme, and expresses himself with moderation and logic. But when the same idea comes from the extreme parties, it is automatically rejected. No one wants to hear about it anymore. And the same with other matters, such as the emigration of Palestinians from Gaza.”
How does all this affect Americans? About President Biden?
“The American side stands by us, but is pressuring us to end the fighting as soon as possible. We know that it is wrong to end the campaign in Gaza in a hurry, but they do not listen to our side calmly. Instead, they hear the extremist voices that shout, ‘Who are you to tell us, we don’t need you, we are not your flag bearers.’ When they hear this from within the government, from members of the Knesset, it has an impact. If the current war cabinet had both Yair Lapid and Avigdor Lieberman as members, then the current government would be more moderate and unifying, and the American attitude would also be completely different, with a more receptive ear.
I regret that Lieberman was not included in the war cabinet. He is one of the oldest and most experienced politicians in the system. An excellent minister of finance, a serious minister of defense. After all, he warned Hamas and even resigned when they did not let him fight against them as needed. He would have challenged the thinking in the cabinet security.
I think that a large part of the public would be much calmer if he were today among the decision makers. But because this government does not include moderate and unifying elements, they do not agree with it, and unfortunately, they do not listen to it either. What the world does not understand today, that in Israel after October 7, everyone more or less shares the same position, from Meretz to Shas, but when the voices that speak it are from an extreme coalition, the tolerance and attention towards it is much less favorable.”
And Netanyahu doesn’t understand that?
“Netanyahu understands this, I’m sure. Over the years he made an effort to form coalitions that were as broad as possible. There have always been elements from the center and the left in the government, because he is a smart statesman and understands our place in the family of nations and the ability to make moves when all the sectors of society are represented. But this time, it did not happen.
The current government, and possibly the last one, is on one side of the political map. Although some claimed initially that it was a full-fledged right-wing government that would fulfill right-wing ideology in the best way, it quickly became apparent that it was not a successful attempt, even before the war, especially during the conflict. It is a shame that they did not learn from their mistakes.
Unfortunately, there are too many political considerations for anyone who makes decisions. We see it in the budget, in conduct, in security. We cannot afford now, in this difficult period, that in the current international, security, economic and political situation, to be influenced by too many political considerations in the decision-making process.”
Netanyahu’s supporters say that there have always been political considerations in making government decisions.
“That’s true, but the proportions have changed. Today, within the orchestration, there are too many harsh voices, too many irrelevant considerations, too many complicated statements. This is a problem. I cry. Really. I look at it from the outside and say, how come they don’t understand that we have no option at all for such a situation.
Once upon a time, in Likud, there were backbenchers, but today, despite having quite a few good Knesset members, the back benches have come to the front of the stage, and the expression of this is in the polls, because the shoulders are no longer wide enough to hide what is happening there. Today, everyone who goes to the elections to vote will say to themselves, the game has changed so much that there is no longer a predominantly excellent majority in Likud, on the contrary, the majority in Likud no longer represents me, and therefore I will not be part of it.”
If you were Likud’s media advisor, what would you say to the party?
“Do a central system overhaul. This party is significant, it was the home of many people in Israel, trust it. It was headed by Begin and Shamir. It was served by people of stature. It still has a good center, but it needs to move in a different way. I would advise it to change its selection method in order to have a better team, because today the top team is no longer able to hide what is happening in the back.”
After October 7
The events of the Black Sabbath in Israel’s history caught Bazak and his family while they were in bed. They heard the alarms, ran to the mamad and were sure it was a mistake. “I told my wife, I can’t understand Hamas, why should they suddenly start with us without any provocation on our part, after all, we will destroy them,” he says. “Slowly things became clear, and I understood that we were fighting yesterday’s war.”
In what way?
“When we address terrorist organizations, its as if it’s a war against a state. When you fight against a state, you consider factors like the well-being of the population, and the long-term economic and international costs. However, this war taught us the hard way that on the other side, there are no such considerations. They want to destroy us, don’t care about the citizens, and yet the citizens support them, which is completely distorted. If their goal is to achieve a Palestinian state, then what they did distanced them significantly from it. Hence, the understanding is gradually eroding that we need to stop talking to them in English. Maybe they will understand better in Russian, or it is better to speak to them in Arabic.”
How do you explain the great failure of all systems?
“Our security system is built on two foundations: military and intelligence. Since it is impossible to station hundreds of thousands of soldiers on the borders for a long time, the system is also built on intelligence, allowing people to sleep at night. Both the military is strong and the intelligence system is magnificent. Over the years, it has thwarted thousands of terrorist attacks. That’s why I think this attitude of thinking we are weak is wrong.
The army is still strong, so is the intelligence, but the other side is no longer an idiot. The other side operated wisely, was very careful, understood that the arms of the intelligence community are long and surprised us, as it happens to the best armies. The shock was also an element of arrogance, this thought that we are the best and therefore we cannot be surprised.
When we were in Boston, there was a big storm that caused a power outage in the rural areas. They were called to inquire, and they were told it would take a month, at least, to fix it. In Israel, if there is a power outage in a house, within two hours, complaints begin, and the whole neighborhood is up in arms. Sometimes we don’t realize how efficient our power company is because we are accustomed to a quick fix.
We are accustomed to our army being the world champion and intelligence not missing anything, but no matter how strong and skilled the army is, it cannot be everywhere in full readiness all the time. There was thorough work here against a chain of failures, and there were also failures, clear, like any strong and skilled army, but it should be remembered that after October 7th, the other side will no longer be able to surprise us.”
Who is responsible?
“Everyone. The army, which does a good job but promised to examine itself the day after. The political echelon, which nurtured a concept meant to discern between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, and I want to teach a right about it. Because political concepts are legitimate even if they are not accepted by everyone. Governments and countries have the right to assume, based on political processes and the good of the country, that one process is more correct than another process. With us, when this approach was successful, they also took credit for it: the quietest decade, the most deterred enemy. Today it is clear that this was not true, but no one is ready to take credit for the big mistake.”
What do you think about the treatment of the abductees?
“On this issue, the government is doing the right things. I greatly appreciate the Chief of Staff and the Defense Minister, who are conducting the fighting in an impressive way and are making every effort not to harm the abductees and are trying to bring them home. I don’t think anyone in the political system takes their eyes off this ball for a moment and doesn’t live it every day.
We see and hear that political and diplomatic efforts that are being made in every possible way despite the war, and despite the dilemmas being so terrible. We have no one to rely on but the leadership and to believe that it makes the best and most correct decisions. We are not generals and do not know how to agree or criticize the conduct of the war.
The problem this time is that trust in all the systems has been shaken. People are saying, wait, maybe the army is not doing exactly what it should be doing? And maybe the political echelon as well, certainly in light of all his statements. Because of the failure, and because of the year ahead, the common man sits in the mamad, in disbelief, rubs his eyes, tugs at his hair, and says it doesn’t make sense for ministers in the government to talk like that about the Americans, who are holding our hand and providing support in this war, and it is not acceptable for them to talk to us about one thing, and suddenly something completely different is heard on the foreign networks and parallel channels.
Something in the public trust has been cracked, and therefore we need to move towards elections, because we cannot afford to face the challenges with a people paralyzed by fear. We need people who believe in the political echelon. We need politicians who plan for the day after, not those who bring popcorn and curse and abuse the Chief of Staff.
We need the day after not only because the Americans rightfully demand it while they support and help us, but so that Sinwar will sit in his hole, trembling with the realization that time is not playing in his favor and for the issue of the abductees to move forward. When they insist on not talking about the day after, trust in the leaders is fatally damaged, as well as the morale and confidence of the soldiers. The government needs to address the day after, otherwise the world will close it over our heads. And then it also has to take responsibility for the failure.”
So far it hasn’t happened, and it’s not certain it will happen in the future.
“There will be elections, and they will be held soon. Many political paths will lead us there. I don’t see a possibility that it won’t happen. I see the trend, the political landscape. It can happen from all kinds of directions. Politicians will want to position themselves correctly for the elections. Those on the right will try to bypass the government, and those within it will not continue to sit when every day they talk about the big problem in the place they sit.
Politicians are looking for their way, they understand that polls matter, and in the end the people will also speak. I don’t see any other way. There will be elections and the people will have their word, and perhaps from this crisis there will be a great correction.”
But in the meantime, we wait for the day after, and those who have an interest can pull the day after, even at a low intensity, for a year, two years, or three years.
“We need to win first. It breaks my heart how everyone mobilizes and fights together, and only some politicians and their supporters continue to fight a battle that no longer exists. Extremism drags the center to the edges and internal wars, and the only one who benefits from them is the enemy.
Today, due to the war, all the disputes seem small and not important. People say, let’s sit with the haredim, with the religious, and with the moderate Arabs and find a way to be together. We need to strengthen the rights of the Druze community, make an effort to bring together the Arab-Israeli community that expresses identification with the Jews at this time, fight crime, work hard for equal rights of the LGBTQ+ community and let everyone live according to their worldview and not decide for them who to love, how to be a Jew and who is a better Jew.”
Bazak today
Shortly after returning from his prolonged mission in the United States, Bazak went to London to serve as the head of the delegation for the Israeli-European Leadership Network (ELNET). In 2020, he was appointed as the CEO of the European Leadership Network (ELNET) organization in Israel. Thus, the European arena is no less familiar to him than the American one. Still, the wave of intense protests that erupted in the streets and campuses in Britain, some European countries, and the United States surprised even him.
“I was a diplomat in years when it was not always easy to represent Israel,” he says in a candid confession. “The struggles in Gaza and Lebanon, settlement in Judea and Samaria, the cradle of our ancestors – these are sensitive issues and not easy to explain even if one believes in them wholeheartedly. But the current situation is entirely different this time. We didn’t do anything to the other side; on the contrary, it did something to us.
We disengaged from Gaza and Lebanon, and in response, we received a terrible massacre. Therefore, when the academic community turned against us, we couldn’t understand why precisely there, at the pinnacle of knowledge, they don’t understand what is really happening in Israel. After all, these are terribly wise people, heads of prestigious institutions – how do they not understand what should be entirely clear.”
From your acquaintance with these bodies, is there an explanation for this?
“Yes. One is the extreme progressive left in Europe and the United States, which is also found in academia and introduces identity politics and division between the oppressor and the oppressed. If you are on the wrong side, then it doesn’t matter what you do or what is done to you.
The second is academic freedom of speech, which allows the younger generation, that supports strange positions out of youthful enthusiasm, to express themselves and influence others through extreme ideologies.
The third is the rich Muslim world. Countries like Saudi Arabia have financed campuses in the United States for years, poured massive dollar amounts into building faculties, financed professors and instilled ideologies. In the end, a person takes care of their own interests, and a professor takes the side of whoever finances them.”
Where is the Jewish funding? Shouldn’t it also carry weight, especially when it’s the correct side of the story?
“It does carry weight, so the president of Harvard resigned. Like the heads of MIT and Pennsylvania, Claudine Gay also came to a hearing with legal advice cautioning against acknowledging guilt and exposing herself to lawsuits. That was the only thing that interested her. She failed to understand that the stage is completely different this time, and that the international story raises many more questions than legal issues.
The moment she refused to say whether the call for violence and genocide against the Jewish people is considered harassment or bullying under the institution’s code of conduct, she cast a great stain on the reputation of Harvard. The president became a liability instead of an asset, and therefore it was clear that it was a matter of weeks until she resigned, regardless of her skin color or background.”
Today Bazak follows the diaspora from his home in Israel, engages in private diplomacy, works with governments, organizations and business entities that manage business and diplomatic relations with Israel, but above all he is a loyal ambassador of the Jewish people in places where advocacy is most needed. He conducts this activity quietly and modestly, mostly behind the scenes and completely voluntarily.
Do you miss politics?
“No. I live well without it.”
Still?
“You know, it depends on the circumstances.”
Comments are closed.