Having recently returned from a trip to Israel, Rep. George Latimer (D-NY) is emphasizing that Israel’s critics in the United States and around the world are overlooking Hamas’ key role in perpetuating the conflict and contributing to the humanitarian issues in Gaza, strengthening the terrorist group’s position and insulating it from external pressures. 

At the same time, the New York Democrat also said that Israel must do more to pursue an end to the war, make its case to the world and provide aid in Gaza.

Latimer, speaking to Jewish Insider last week, said that the trip, organized by the AIPAC-affiliated American Israel Education Foundation for Democratic freshmen and leading Democratic lawmakers, had reinforced his view that the situation on the ground is more complicated than the more simplistic narratives demonizing Israel that have been spread by some critics and media.

“When you see on the ground, you understand it is not a simple black-and-white situation,” Latimer, a first-term congressman from Westchester County, N.Y., who sits on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said. “People come up to me and say, ‘Israel is practicing genocide. What they’re doing is evil and we need to stop it.’ And then you get on the ground and you realize how much more complicated it is than that.”

He said that American critics of Israel fail to acknowledge Hamas’ “role in all of this and its contributory actions.” He said he sees a “lack of appreciation here in the United States that Hamas is committed — has shown no signs to want to sit, talk peace, have a cessation of hostilities. … That makes it very, very hard to plot a strategy, if the other side is completely intransigent.”

Latimer said the situation is comparable to overlooking the fact that the U.S. entered World War II because Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, or that the U.S. invaded Afghanistan because of the 9/11 attacks. He said that the “mindset” that motivated such attacks doesn’t disappear overnight, and can take protracted conflict to address.

At the same time, he said that “there’s a gap between what [the Israeli government] needs to be doing and what it is doing, and it’s a serious gap.” He said he doesn’t see proposals to relocate the population of Gaza out of the enclave, discussed during a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as “workable” or “humane.”

He addressed friction within Israeli society over Israel’s war plans in Gaza, and said that Netanyahu’s decision-making may be shaped by his far-right coalition members, adding that “if there’s no movement from Hamas, what can you ask Israel to do unilaterally?”

“So Netanyahu’s strategies present as intransigent in the face of intransigence on the other side,” Latimer continued. “You need some joint breakthrough where both sides step back from the path that they’re on, and both sides have to be willing to do that, if you can expect the other side to also then do that.”

He noted the difficulty of forcing a dug-in enemy like Hamas to surrender, comparing it to the challenge of forcing a Japanese surrender during WWII.

Latimer unseated Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), a vocal Israel critic, in the 2024 Democratic primary, boosted by significant support from his district’s Jewish community as well as national pro-Israel groups.

Latimer told JI he thinks Israel has not done enough to try to win over or influence global opinion in its favor. Latimer said he believes that the Israeli government views such efforts as a lost cause and not worth attempting.

“There’s a case to be made [for Israel]. But in lieu of that, the rhetoric is all what Israel is doing and not doing, and how evil they are, when, in fact, all of this came from an attack that was horrific on Oct. 7,” Latimer said.

He said that there have been “atrocities” on the Israeli side, pointing broadly to settler violence in the West Bank, but said that “the question is, overall, are you weighing all of these things together, or as the world opinion, and much of the United States opinion, particularly among younger people, has been framed completely around ‘Israel bad,’” ignoring the “evil that’s been done on behalf of the other side of this. That is a contributing reason why we’re in the situation we’re in.”

“The fact that people are starving is horrific. But as long as the world blames Israel for it solely, Hamas is winning. Why would they change any strategies?” Latimer said. “The leaders of Hamas are not sitting in the tunnels. … They’re sitting in the safety of the protection of [Turkish President Recep Tayyip] Erdogan or over in Qatar. Therefore, they’re not under the pressure.”

Latimer said that the food supply in Gaza was a key issue he examined on the trip, calling starvation in Gaza a “legitimate” problem. 

He said that the current four Gaza Humanitarian Foundation aid distribution sites are “nowhere near enough,” given the “massive number of people that need to be fed and housed.”

But he added that Hamas being “unwilling to cooperate” in the safe delivery of aid is an impediment to efforts to improve the humanitarian situation and that the United Nations “in the eyes of the Israelis, has lost credibility.” 

He said that the best path forward would likely be for a coalition of Arab countries to take the lead of a humanitarian aid distribution entity: “We need to have a third party that has credibility.”

“Israel is not doing enough to solve the problem, and Hamas is doing things to prohibit the problem from being solved,” Latimer said, calling on Israel to work to increase the number of food distribution centers and strengthen supply lines and on Hamas to stop attempting to intercept food and sow chaos at distribution sites.

“The fact that people are starving is horrific. But as long as the world blames Israel for it solely, Hamas is winning. Why would they change any strategies?” he said. “The leaders of Hamas are not sitting in the tunnels. … They’re sitting in the safety of the protection of [Turkish President Recep Tayyip] Erdogan or over in Qatar. Therefore, they’re not under the pressure.”

“What I saw in September 2005 gave me hope. What I see when I go back 20 years later is, you shake your head and you go, ‘Why did it turn out this way?’” Latimer said. “Did it turn out this way because Israel wanted it to turn out this way? Israel didn’t want Oct. 7. Israel didn’t want all of its young men in the reserves and active duty, constantly on a wartime footing.”

He declined to weigh in definitively — citing the limited information at his disposal and his limited power as a lone congressman — on whether the U.S. needs to increase pressure on its allies in Turkey or Qatar to expel or detain those Hamas leaders, but said that “clearly there has been insufficient pressure on Hamas” because its leaders have shown no urgency to return the hostages, negotiate in good faith or participate in un-corrupted food distribution.

Latimer said he first traveled to Israel two decades ago, just after the Israeli disengagement from Gaza, and that there was hope at the time that the Israeli withdrawal would “allow the opportunity for Gaza to experience peace and some kind of growth.”

“What I saw in September 2005 gave me hope. What I see when I go back 20 years later is, you shake your head and you go, ‘Why did it turn out this way?’” Latimer said. “Did it turn out this way because Israel wanted it to turn out this way? Israel didn’t want Oct. 7. Israel didn’t want all of its young men in the reserves and active duty, constantly on a wartime footing.”

He said that if Gaza’s leaders had pursued growth and development over the past 20 years, “we could be in a very different place today,” but instead Hamas seized power and used Gaza as a platform to attack Israel.

Asked about recent decisions by European countries to unilaterally recognize a Palestinian state, which came around the time of Latimer’s trip, the congressman said that he supports a two-state solution, but one that “comes out of a negotiated process,” noting the many outstanding issues to be worked through.

“You cannot expect Israel to survive with a hostile entity interspersed with its borders, and yet be its own country. And there has to be a sense that this country can function and provide its services to its people and maintain civil control. None of those things are automatically in place yet, so I don’t know what we’re recognizing in substance,” Latimer said. 

“I think what we’re recognizing in symbolism is European countries that basically are saying, ‘We need to have a two state solution,’ and probably their population is reacting to what’s happening in the moment and putting pressure on their governments to do this,” he continued.

“The Palestinian Authority certainly has a steep mountain to climb, but right now, they’re the best hope that you have of a presence — and certainly it’s not Hamas, it’s certainly not coming out of any of the groups that Iran is backing or has backed,” Latimer said.

Based on the delegation’s meeting with Palestinian Authority leaders, Latimer said that he believes there is an “intent” and “willingness” in the PA to pursue needed reform and bolster credibility with the Palestinian population.

“How much success they’re going to have with the civilian population to accomplish those things — it’s going to be a tall task,” he said.

At the same time, he noted that some Arab governments such as those in Jordan and Egypt maintain cooperative relationships with Israel even as many of their citizens remain hostile.

“The Palestinian Authority certainly has a steep mountain to climb, but right now, they’re the best hope that you have of a presence — and certainly it’s not Hamas, it’s certainly not coming out of any of the groups that Iran is backing or has backed,” he continued.

In the long term, Latimer added, the Abraham Accords represent a path forward for the region, and said that moderate Sunni Arab states want to see a viable and demilitarized Palestinian Authority government that can credibly govern the Palestinian people.

Reps. Laura Gillen (D-NY), Tom Suozzi (D-NY) and George Latimer (D-NY) declined to support State Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, the presumptive Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, citing ongoing concerns about his ideological record, as many other prominent politicians in the state fell in line.

“Socialist Zohran Mamdani is too extreme to lead New York City,” Gillen said, highlighting his calls for higher taxes and what she described as unrealistic campaign promises. “Beyond that, Mr. Mamdani has called to defund the police and has demonstrated a deeply disturbing pattern of unacceptable antisemitic comments which stoke hate at a time when antisemitism is skyrocketing. He is the absolute wrong choice for New York.”

“I had serious concerns about Assemblyman Mamdani before yesterday, and that is one of the reasons I endorsed his opponent. Those concerns remain,” Suozzi said. Suozzi, once a close ally of New York Mayor Eric Adams, endorsed former Gov. Andrew Cuomo in the final weeks of the race, explaining “I don’t want the socialists to win.”

Latimer, who also endorsed Cuomo, said he was surprised by Mamdani’s performance, credited him with a “very energetic campaign” and called him “clearly a very charismatic figure.” But he was also clear that he was not endorsing Mamdani and left open the possibility of endorsing a third-party challenger.

“I haven’t thought about it at all yet, check back with me once things shake out. I don’t want to be presumptive if I don’t know what’s going to happen,” Latimer told reporters, referring to potential uncertainties around whether Adams, Cuomo and Republican Curtis Sliwa stay in the race. “I’m not endorsing anybody at this point.”

He said that he was concerned that “running New York City is an extremely complicated situation … it takes a certain mindset not to just advocate for policies — as popular as they are — but to actually accomplish them.” Latimer said Mamdani would likely have to appeal to the state Legislature and would face difficult cash crunches as he seeks to implement his signature, and costly, campaign promises.

“I know how popular it would be for me to say things and promise things. I try to be careful about what I promise because whether I can deliver it or not becomes the first test of whether I’m effective in that office,” he continued.

Asked by Jewish Insider about Mamdani’s record on antisemitism, Latimer highlighted his own opposition to and work on combating hate.

“You shouldn’t have to feel afraid to walk in the streets with yarmulke on. … You should be treated for who you are as a person,” Latimer said. “So to the extent that you know there’s, there’s a sense that there’s an antisemitic moment, then we can’t add code words and make it worse, we have to fight to try to have people be treated equally all across the board, including those who are Jewish.”

Both Gillen and Suozzi represent Long Island-based swing districts in the outskirts of New York City. Suozzi’s district includes a slice of Queens. Latimer’s district is primarily in Westchester County, but includes a small piece of the Bronx.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), meanwhile, endorsed Mamdani on Wednesday, after backing one of his primary challengers, saying Mamdani was committed to fighting antisemitism.

Nadler, a co-chair of the House Jewish Caucus, said he had “spoken to [Mamdani] today about his commitment to fighting antisemitism, and we’ll work with all New Yorkers to fight against all bigotry and hate.”

“Voters in New York City demanded change and, with Zohran’s triumph, we have a direct repudiation of Donald Trump’s politics of tax cuts and authoritarianism,” Nadler added, describing Mamdani as a future “partner to me in Washington to take on Donald Trump.”

Other prominent New York Democrats including Sens. Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries have offered praise for Mamdani in the hours since his victory, declining to address his antisemitic history. They held back explicit endorsements.

Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Nydia Velazquez (D-NY) supported Mamdani in the primary. No other New York Democratic lawmakers responded to requests for comment.

In the region’s northern suburbs, Mamdani’s candidacy is likely to emerge quickly as a hot-button issue in the swing district race in New York’s 17th Congressional District, which is home to a substantial Jewish population.

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), the 17th District incumbent, has repeatedly attacked Democratic leaders across the state over Mamdani’s victory, particularly highlighting his record on antisemitism.

“Democrats need to make very clear to voters where they stand on this,” Lawler told reporters. “You’ve already had Laura Gillen speak out against it, and yet, Hakeem Jeffries, Chuck Schumer and Kathy Hochul put together the most gobbly-gook bull***t statements I’ve ever seen in my life, saying nothing about anything except that they’re going to continue to speak with him, whatever the hell that means.”

Three of the seven Democratic 17th District candidates who responded to questions from Jewish Insider about Mamdani took divergent approaches.

Cait Conley, a former national security official, told JI that she does “not agree with the direction Zohran wants to take NYC. We need to address affordability but not by raising already exorbitant taxes on New Yorkers that will just drive more people out of the state. We need to stand up for the NY Jewish community and stand against anti-semitism in all forms.”

Conley argued that the election results show that voters are looking for alternatives, like herself, to career politicians, adding, “I will never stop standing up to hate. Anti-semitism is on the rise across this country which is both unacceptable and un-American.”

Jessica Reinmann, a nonprofit executive, told JI, “The results of last night’s NYC mayoral race underscore the need for the kind of boots-on-the-ground, community-focused effort that Team Reinmann is building — one focused on kitchen-table issues, meeting people where they are, and addressing their concerns.”

“That said, there should be no tolerance in the Democratic Party for candidates who espouse antisemitic and hateful views,” Reinmann continued. “Team Reinmann is building a coalition that is built on respect for all people, no matter who they pray to, where they come from, who they love, or the color of their skin.”

Peter Chatzky, a tech company founder and deputy mayor of Briarcliff Manor, N.Y., praised Mamdani for “an effective campaign that consistently focused on affordability, fairness, and opportunity in New York City.”

“The Democratic Party needs candidates who are hearing constituent concerns and will take on the Trump administration and fight for the people of their districts,” Chatzky said. “I am excited to bring that message to the voters of the Hudson Valley.”

Pressed on Mamdani’s record on antisemitism, Chatzky added, “To be clear, antisemitism is serious and a real threat to Jewish New Yorkers and needs to be taken with utmost seriousness. It is something I will be on the forefront of for the people of the 17th District every day.”

Neither Gillen nor Suozzi indicated whether they plan to support an alternative candidate like Adams, the incumbent who is running as an independent in the general election.

Suozzi said, when he endorsed Cuomo, that he still likes Adams, but argued he’s too mired in scandal to continue to lead. Adams’ team praised Suozzi’s record even after his endorsement of Cuomo.

Gillen, meanwhile, publicly clashed with Adams at a House Oversight Committee hearing earlier this year, saying she had “no confidence” in his leadership and calling on him to resign. She said previously that he had “failed and betrayed New York City repeatedly” and engaged in “blatant, textbook corruption. She has said that New York Gov. Kathy Hochul should remove him from office.

Given that Mamdani appears headed for a fairly sizable margin of victory in the primary and the city’s largely Democratic electorate, any third-party challenge will be a tough lift.

Cuomo hasn’t confirmed yet whether he will seek to run in the general election as an independent, a prospect that could further complicate efforts for Mamdani opponents to coalesce.