The U.S. and the escalation in Gaza: Strong support, not an open check
By Col. (res.) Udi Evental | Spotlight: Israel & The Middle East | June, 2021
 |
| Photo: The White House |
The escalation in Gaza formed the Biden Administration's first test in the Palestinian arena. As the fighting raged, President Biden with the active participation of his senior cabinet members – his national security advisor, secretaries of state and defense, and ambassador to the U.N. – took diplomatic steps, in the international arena and the regional one (particularly vis à vis Egypt) to encourage de-escalation and a ceasefire.
An examination of the U.S. administration's conduct throughout the eleven-day Operation Guardian of the Walls reveals that, as time went by, Washington shifted from clear support of Israel and an effort to ensure its freedom of action so as to allow it to achieve its military goals to an approach consisting of more "balanced" messages until, ultimately, it unequivocally demanded that the fighting end and a ceasefire be reached.
U.S. patience is on the decline
During the early days of Operation Guardian of the Walls, in media briefings or published readouts of conversations between Biden and Netanyahu, or senior U.S. government officials with their Israeli counterparts, the administration primarily emphasized Israel's right to defend itself, condemning the rocket launching by Hamas and other terror groups in Gaza.
At the same time, on several occasions throughout the conflict, the United States had stopped the U.N. Security Council from issuing statements and the French from passing a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire. The administration clearly indicated that its actions behind the scenes were far more effective in restoring peace than U.N. declarations would have been.
However, from the sixth day of fighting onwards, a shift was noted in the American approach to the operation. In the call held between President Biden and Prime Minister Netanyahu on May 15, the former expressed his concern over the violence that swept over mixed Arab-Jewish cities in Israel, the escalation in the West Bank, and the safety of journalists (following Israel's attack against the building in Gaza that housed some foreign medial outlets). Two days later, while continuing to express his support of Israel's right to defend itself, President Biden discussed the "progress in Israel's military operations against Hamas" and, for the first time, "expressed his support for a ceasefire". Two days after that, when the gist of the conversation between the two leaders were published, there was no mention of support for Israel's right to defend itself; the call focused on "Israel’s progress in degrading the capabilities of Hamas and other terrorist elements", and during it, the president "conveyed to the Prime Minister that he expected a significant de-escalation today on the path to a ceasefire".
Meanwhile, on May 16, the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., Linda Thomas-Greenfield, gave a detailed speech featuring a clearly balanced approach between the Israeli and Palestinian sides. The Ambassador did not note Israel's right to defend itself; she underscored the high human toll of rockets and airstrikes; urged both parties to ensure the protection of civilians and respect international humanitarian law; avoided calling Hamas and other groups in Gaza terror organizations; and urged all parties within Israeli borders to refrain from incitement, violent attacks, terrorist acts, evictions – including in East Jerusalem – demolitions, and settlement construction east of the 1967 lines.
What's behind the shift in American attitude?
Three key factors have guided and impacted the Biden Administration's policy on the escalation in Gaza. The first is support for Israel, commitment to its security, and the strategic need that it has the upper hand when emerging from the conflict with the terror groups and radical axis in the Middle East. The second pertains to the cost-effectiveness of the ongoing fighting in Gaza when the number of uninvolved civilians impacted is rising, and the crisis threatens to spill over to other arenas, forcing the U.S. to intervene in contrast to its strategic set of priorities. The third is the pressure exerted against Biden by the Democratic Party and Congress.
It is these last two factors that have led to the change in the administration's policy.
The fighting in Gaza – as the fighting progressed, it became evident that the Biden Administration does not understand Israel's strategy or what it is seeking to accomplish. Reportedly, the administration was gradually realizing that the IDF's military objectives had been achieved, and Biden told Netanyahu that if the conflict were to go on, it could spiral out of control. The same view was shared by the Pentagon's Joint Chiefs of Staff, as its chairman, General Milley, publicly warned that the longer the fighting would drag on, the more the potential for destabilization in the region would grow.
The Democratic Party – Biden's refusal to call for an immediate ceasefire placed him in conflict with his party's progressive wing. In the heat of fighting, a majority comprising 29 of the 50 progressive Democratic senators issued a statement calling for a ceasefire contrary to Israel's standpoint. During the campaign, the party's left-leaning leaders presented a resolution designed to stop a $735 arms sale to Israel, and called for conditioning the security assistance offered to Israel upon an immediate ceasefire.
Even if these blatant attacks against Israel are being led by loud members of the "squad", which accuses Israel of war crimes and apartheid, surveys reveal that the critical approach to Israel among party ranks as well as its constituents is more widespread. During the fighting, most Democratic Congressmen and women avoided making a public statement about the events, or expressed a balanced view on the conflict. This atmosphere even affected some of Israel's greatest supporters among the party's leaders, such as senators Bob Menendez and Chuck Schumer. The first expressed support for Israel's right to defend itself while also stating he was "deeply troubled by reports of Israeli military actions that resulted in the death of innocent civilians in Gaza as well as Israeli targeting of buildings housing international media outlets". The second avoided expressing his support for Israel during this recent operation altogether.
The heads of the Democratic Party, such as House Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer, came to Israel's aid arguing that the "extremists" in the Democratic Party were promoting a policy that served the terror groups and undermined U.S. relations with its ally, Israel. President Biden's statement about U.S. policy as the ceasefire entered into force also clearly corresponded with criticism voiced by his own party. The president reiterated, among other statements made, that there was no shift in American commitment to Israel's security (or in U.S. security assistance), and that, as part of the two-state solution, the region must acknowledge Israel's right to exist as an independent Jewish state.
Looking to the future and implications for Israel
The campaign in Gaza has demonstrated Israel's profound need in American support and optimal coordination with the administration when facing all strategic challenges. The futile conflict with President Biden with regard to the return to the JCPOA with Iran, which was once again revealed during the Secretary of State's visit in Israel when the operation ended, could cast a shadow over the overall relations between the two countries, and impede Israel's ability to receive the American assistance, support, and guarantees it needs in various arenas.
The war in Gaza forced the Biden Administration to invest significantly in the Palestinian arena while clearly seeking to reduce its engagement in this area as it identifies the futility of efforts to set the wheels of a peace process in motion once again and, more importantly, as part of a policy that strives to minimize U.S. involvement in the Middle East to make time for grappling with Asia and what, in the administration's view, is a historical challenge currently posed by China.
The events are therefore likely to lead to increased U.S. involvement in the Palestinian arena if only in order to ensure that the security balance and stability are maintained in the region and events do not spiral out of control, distracting the United States from its strategic set of priorities.
It seems that the role played by Egypt – which the administration defined as critical – will strengthen Biden's view whereby a realistic policy, that does not place democracy and human rights above all else, is the right way for the United States to conduct itself vis à vis its Middle Eastern allies.
Egypt is expected to play central role in the immediate goals Biden is already setting in the Palestinian arena: promoting an international package for rehabilitating Gaza in coordination with the Palestinian Authority and not Hamas in a way that will not allow the latter to take advantage of the aid offered to restore its military capabilities; renewing its commitment to West Bank Palestinians' security and economy, and strengthening Abu Mazen and the Palestinian Authority (while renewing its ties with it by reopening the East Jerusalem Consulate).
The events in Gaza have also clearly highlighted the worrisome trend with respect to Israel's image and status in the United States. Israel has become the main foreign policy issue dividing the Democratic Party, and a key bone of contention between the two camps in U.S. politics. So much so, that it is of detriment to its status as an apolitical bipartisan consensus – a key traditional asset of Israel in the United States.
Views associated with racial injustice, which seem to be heard more prominently in the internal dispute between left and right in the United States, are "imposed" on the Israeli-Palestinian context in a manner that places Israel on the same side as those criticized. Although Israel has a "deep bench" of support in the Democratic Party, it is being led by the older leadership generation, whereas the younger generation among party ranks is challenging the traditional support of Israel.
These trends are an exacerbating strategic challenge that Israel must address.
Finally, the escalation in Gaza has demonstrated that clear military objectives and an effective operational ability to achieve them, as well as control of the events, play a significant role in Washington's stopwatch, and the time it is willing to allow Israel to have to exhaust its military and political goals.
Authored by Col. (res.) Udi Evental.
If you wish to receive the weekly brief regularly, please follow the link to register.
