Gaza and the Mistakes of American Policy

History will not be kind to Joe Biden’s presidency in judging his handling of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza. At best, his response will be judged indifferent.

There are many examples of weakness:

On April 4, 2024, The New York Times published an article titled: “President Biden told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that future American support will be determined by how Israel treats civilians in Gaza,” which stated:

President Biden on Thursday threatened to condition future support for Israel on how it addresses his concerns about civilian casualties and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, prompting Israel to commit to allowing more food and other supplies into the besieged enclave in hopes of appeasing him.

The newspaper also reported: “During a tense 30-minute call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Biden for the first time used American aid to influence the course of the war against Hamas, which has angered many Americans and others around the world.”

After the call, Secretary of State Antony Blinken commented, “If we don’t see the changes we need to see, there will be policy changes.”

Seven and a half months later, another 12,000 Palestinians were killed in the schools, hospitals and mosques where they had sought safety. Tent camps filled with desperate refugees were bombed, and Israel continued to block the delivery of humanitarian aid. The US administration’s “threat” went unheeded.

Then, on October 13, Secretaries of State and Defense Blinken and Lloyd Austin wrote to the Israeli government expressing concern about the “dire” humanitarian situation in Gaza, citing the isolation of the northern part of the Strip, repeated evacuation orders, withholding of humanitarian aid, targeting of aid workers, and other Israeli policies that have negatively affected Palestinians. They gave Israel 30 days to improve the humanitarian situation and protect civilians in Gaza, or face unspecified consequences.

After the Democratic losses in November, some commentators assumed that, with the political pressures lifted, President Biden might move boldly to address the crisis in Gaza and confront Netanyahu and the incoming Trump administration. But four actions taken by the Biden administration over the past week have shown that such hopes were in vain.

As the deadline for the Blinken/Austin letter approached, US and international aid groups and Biden administration humanitarian officials told the ministers that the situation in Gaza had worsened, that deliveries of food, water, and medicine remained woefully inadequate, that aid workers were still under threat, and that famine was looming. As winter approached, they warned, the humanitarian crisis would worsen. Yet on November 12, the US gave Israel a deceptive “success” assessment of “improvements” in Gaza.

On November 20, the United States vetoed a new ceasefire resolution at the UN Security Council, after months of negotiations, which hampered the international community’s efforts to end the war. Most disturbing was the apparent claim by the United States that it opposed the resolution because it did not call for the immediate release of the Israeli hostages, when it specifically called for “an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire and the release of all hostages.”

On the same day, the US Senate voted on three bills opposing the supply of billions of dollars in American weapons to Israel. Supporting senators claimed that supplying these weapons to Israel violated US laws that prohibit their use if they are used in a way that endangers civilians or obstructs humanitarian aid. Ignoring the factual basis for these accusations and the evidence of violations of US laws, the White House issued “talking points” to senators in its own party, accusing them of “refusing to buy weapons for Israel at this moment would benefit Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas.” The White House’s use of this approach to incite senators in its own party was deeply troubling.

So, it’s clear that President Biden will end his term with no change in heart or policy. Just last month, he repeatedly rejected opportunities to distance himself from Israeli policies.