A WEEK ago, the Scottish Government’s Cabinet Secretary for Constitution, External Affairs and Culture, Angus Robertson, met Israel’s deputy ambassador to the UK, Daniela Grudsky. After ten months of Israel’s genocidal destruction of Gaza, and increasing violent attacks in the West Bank, the decision to meet the deputy ambassador was both extraordinary and a desperate failure on the Scottish Government’s part.

Understandably, the Scottish Government did not publicise this meeting but once Grudsky posted a photo of her and Robertson on Twitter/X three days ago, the news was out.

It’s worth quoting Grudsky’s tweet in full: “Thank you Angus Robertson for welcoming us to wonderful Scotland. Discussed the unique commonalities between Israel and Scotland, and also emphasized the urgent need to bring back our 115 hostages. Looking forward to cooperating in the fields of technology, culture and renewable energy.”

There is the fundamental question here of why meet an Israeli diplomat in the face of the continuing horror of bombed schools, hospitals, children, women, men, infrastructure. But also, if – as the Scottish Government says – the purpose was to make its position clear on the need for a ceasefire, why would you then discuss cooperating on anything – let alone a trio of technology, culture and renewables?

The Scottish Government’s position on a ceasefire has been clear from the start – unlike Labour, when in opposition, who took until this March to clearly call for a ceasefire. There was no need or reason to meet the deputy ambassador to restate the Scottish Government’s well-known position on this.

And Scotland is not a state. It doesn’t have a foreign policy. It has an external affairs strategy that can be usefully assessed as some sort of paradiplomacy. But it has no need to meet the representative of a government engaged in the sustained destruction and starvation of Gaza. The UK Government, unlike the US, has precious little leverage on Israel, though it certainly could and should end arms sales to Israel – as the Scottish Government has called for. But the Scottish Government has no influence and no reason at all to have had this meeting.

READ MORE: SNP MP voices 'anger' over Scottish Government meeting with Israel

And what we see in this disastrous meeting is effectively a trashing of the moral high ground that the Scottish Government had occupied on Gaza. When we have no or little influence, then demonstrating, taking clear positions, acting in solidarity, speaking out is what we have to do whether as individuals or as a devolved government.

After Grudsky’s tweet provoked widespread outrage, First Minister John Swinney stepped in with a thread on Twitter/X, defending the indefensible meeting.

Swinney summarised the Scottish Government’s position as follows: “As First Minister and SNP leader, I will never hold back in expressing support for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the release of all hostages, an end to UK arms being sent to Israel, and the recognition of a sovereign Palestinian state within a two-state solution.”

First Minister John Swinney has defended the meeting with the Israeli diplomat

The meeting was a damaging folly. And in responding after the event, the First Minister could and should surely have condemned the most recent bombings of schools, the desperate needs of the Palestinians in Gaza, referenced the need for full investigation of war crimes, referred to South Africa’s ICJ genocide case against Israel. But none of that was in Swinney’s thread.

A brief look at Swinney’s Twitter/X posts since then range from being at the Edinburgh Tattoo to dualling the A9 to Scotland’s international development work.

Robertson’s Twitter/X timeline since is focused mainly on culture and the Edinburgh festivals – he doesn’t appear to have retweeted Swinney’s defence of him, though he retweets the First Minister on Malawi.

Where now for the Scottish Government’s paradiplomacy?

The Scottish Government has, in the last few years, at times shown a reasonably deft paradiplomacy ranging from its strengthening of Scottish-European relations post-Brexit to a variety of international climate networks and initiatives. But the meeting with the Israeli deputy ambassador suggests the Scottish Government needs to step back and take a long hard look at itself and its international strategy.

The Scottish Government has a relatively new international strategy published just this January. It sets out three priorities for international activity: “(1) economy, trade and investment; (2) climate change, biodiversity and renewable energy; and (3) reputation, influence and relationships.”

Well, the latter is for now well and truly shot. And the ministerial foreword at the end of January, after four months of relentless Israeli attacks on Gaza, also refers to “the tragic events unfolding in Gaza following Hamas’s appalling attack on Israel”. This passive “tragic events” should be changed in the face of what we have seen and see today in Gaza.

Some 85% of Gaza's population has been displaced by the Israeli offensive, reports say

The “Brand Scotland” reputational aims, in the international strategy, are to work with the Scottish Government’s international network to “build and consolidate our links with key international stakeholders in priority policy areas for the benefit of Scotland and the people who live here”. The document also talks about “projecting the values we want to embody on the world stage”. Nothing in the document would lead anyone to expect the political folly and outrage of last week’s meeting which has undermined the Scottish Government’s reputation as sharply and swiftly as any opponent could wish.

Under the last Tory government, there were periodic stand-offs with the Scottish Government when Scottish ministerial meetings with EU and other politicians ruffled Tory foreign policy sensitivities. But the row over last week’s meeting is one that is of the Scottish Government’s making alone. A serious reflection on its meetings and international positioning is needed urgently. And an apology for the meeting instead of a defence of it would be a good start.

Kirsty Hughes is a fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh and was the founder and director of the Scottish Centre on European Relations from 2017-2021. This article was originally published on her Substack blog, which you can find here.