The man who held important positions as Prime Minister of his country and as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) was regarded by many as the man best suited to run the United Nations. He came with reformist ideas and found that organizational changes involve struggles for prestige between countries. He found a very heavy organization, in which one must walk on tiptoe, and whose Secretary-General is not, in fact, the person who works at its head, as opposed to the person who fulfils the role of Prime Minister in every country, but someone who is destined to carry out the decisions of the most cumbersome organization in the world, even if he himself is not happy with them.

When he reached the 38th floor, he intended to focus on global warming and international agreements to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and wanted to believe that the world would cooperate with him because the consequences of global warming are universal. But he found an American president who set himself the goal of weakening the ingenious international organizations established after the end of World War II to prevent a similar war from happening again. Donald Trump does not believe in international organizations, medicines, or humanity's contribution to global warming. Running the United Nations at the same time as Trump's one-and-a-half terms, when the American president cut its wings and budget dramatically, became Guterres' biggest challenge, and he successfully met it despite the impossible conditions.

But if the very existence of the organization becomes your main concern, it is very difficult for you to deal with the issues you planned to address when you came to office. At least for the next two years, his successor will have to deal with the same challenge, and it is reasonable to assume that the bitter taste with which Guterres leaves office will characterize, at least, the first two years of his successor's term. Surely, saving the organization in its most difficult years will be remembered as Guterres' most important achievement, and it is indeed a very important achievement, but it is accompanied by the frustration of a man who loves to "move things" and who has encountered countless obstacles.

I have been accompanying Guterres, as a friend, for about 40 years: through his great successes during his first term as Prime Minister; the challenges he had to deal with during his second term; the period in which he headed the Socialist International; the years in which he managed the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees with great success; and his ten years as Secretary-General of the United Nations. In all these positions, I heard from him words of appreciation for Israel, criticism of the fact that Israel has not done enough for peace, and empathy for its many challenges. Against this background, it was difficult for me to watch the process in which the Secretary-General has been portrayed as Israel's nemesis.

There is no doubt that Netanyahu was influenced by Trump and received a tailwind from him, but I find it hard to come to terms with the intolerable ease with which the state that was established following the UN General Assembly's partition resolution is dismissing the importance of that institution.

It was also difficult for me to accept Guterres' words, after the horrific massacre carried out by Hamas in southern Israel, describing it as an act that was not committed in a vacuum. This created a sense that the motives for the massacre could be understood, even if it was condemned in its entirety, and that understanding the motives could lead, in many cases, to acceptance of the act itself. This was not Guterres' intention, and he had to find another expression to convey his anger at the Israeli response and the tens of thousands of Palestinians killed in the Gaza Strip, some of whom had nothing to do with terrorism and violence.

But in the eyes of the Israeli government, this man, who has been fighting all his life for peace in our world, has become a nemesis, and even his request to come to Israel has not been answered. If, after the Israeli elections at the end of October, a different government is formed, it is likely that its attitude towards the UN will be different, but for Guterres it will be too late, which is a shame.