Terry H. Schwadron
May 21, 2024
Even for those who insist on strict, U.S. backing for any and all actions by Israel against Hamas, there must now be a question: Which Israeli government policies — indeed, which Israeli government — are we to back totally in black and white terms.
At the same time that congressmen from both parties have introduced resolutions, however futile, to demand that Joe Biden provide all offensive weaponry, including 2,000-pound tunnel buster bombs, to pursue the war among refugees in southern Gaza, the coalition that is Israel’s government is melting down over the failure to sketch a way out of the war.
In the last week or more, the leadership of the Israeli Defense Forces have broken with the government over the lack of any so-called Day After plans, and Benny Gantz, the main opponent to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and Yoav Gallant, defense minister, have delivered an ultimatum to withdraw support for the wartime cabinet unless Netanyahu comes up with such a plan. Hundreds of thousands of Israelis are in the street to tell Netanyahu that his time in office is over because he won’t prioritize the return of hostages over continuing the war. There are divisions, but it is unclear whether there is a desire for change.
Of course, this is pressure toward exactly that kind of governance plan for Gaza that Biden has been using his pause in providing those offensive weapons from use in a wide incursion into Rafah, where a million or more Palestinian civilians stand in the way of Hamas targets.
In short, our own American debate is about backing Israel without hesitation over effects on civilians, even as Israelis are questioning what the end goal of this eight-month war is.
When Is It Over?
The emergent question, which we are seeing in a lot of analyses now, is whether Israeli security will be better off if and when Hamas is “defeated.”
We are not even sure what defeat means, since this war, like its predecessor conflicts, already is building new generations of Palestinian anger that will outlive the leaders of the Hamas terror clique — with support from surrounding Arab and Muslim nations. Much behind the Hamas attacks is hatred of Israel — and Jews — but it also is in reaction to sustained treatment at the hands of an increasingly right-wing Israeli government coalition that is grabbing land in the West Bank and now wants to move in permanently to the Gaza Strip in the name of security.
Reports and columnists say current and former senior military officers are arguing more openly that because the government has failed to roll out a plan for what follows the fighting in Gaza, Israeli troops are being forced to fight again for areas of the territory where Hamas fighters have reappeared. They say the lack of “day after” plans is making it easier for Hamas to reconstitute itself in places such as Jabaliya in northern Gaza.
Netanyahu has resisted calls to bring the fighting to an end, arguing that there can be no civilian government in Gaza until Hamas is destroyed. Netanyahu himself is widely seen as prolonging conflict for his own political preservation in office.
Gantz, who presents himself as more moderate a leader than Netanyahu, is willing to end the current coalition over the question. The outcome could end up being a yet-more right-wing outlook that would insist on permanent occupation, continuing warfare, and replacement of communities in Gaza with Jewish settlements.
Plus, there is the international outrage over Israel’s conduct of warfare in ways that has delivered indiscriminate harm on civilians in apparent violation of rules of war.
In summary, there are military questions here, political questions, and any number of practical issues that suggest the situation in Israel and Gaza is far more complicated than reflected in a singular congressional resolution to scold Biden for pressuring Netanyahu.
In the U.S.
The United States is caught trying to balance humanitarian concerns with anti-terrorist objectives, concerns about long-range peace against reprisals for the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel and managing a defense for its ally in the Middle East not only from the world, but from its own political fissures.
The United States and other nations are caught in a puzzle that equates the anti-Semitism of Hamas for Zionist expansion and the perception that Jews the world over are the target.
Biden’s administration reportedly had been near closing a deal with Saudi Arabia for recognition of Israel but for Gaza. Netanyahu is clear that even such a prospect is too high a price to pay for a two-state solution that would leave Israel subject to terror attacks from a neighboring state.
Instead, in an American election year, we’re seeing campuses seething over anti-war sentiments cloaked in sympathy for Palestinian civilians and over occupation policies in Israel. And we’re seeing the usual law-and-order summations of disorder that bypass the substantive and diverse protest for pictures of a few failed building takeovers.
In The Hague, the International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor has requested arrest warrants for the leaders of Hamas and for Netanyahu of Israel for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Again, the U.S. is caught with opposing positions it takes on Russian aggression in Ukraine and on Israel-Gaza.
Donald Trump is taking Biden to task for not fully backing Netanyahu, and ridiculing American Jews who see questions about all this or who separate questions about Zionism and anti-Semitism. Students aligning with “pro-Palestinian” causes that really feel like anti-war statements are criticizing Biden for failing to see the whole picture, while failing to fully separate the concerns.
A fair number of U.S. election analysts think the criticisms from Right and Left could be a deciding factor in a close presidential race, particularly in states like Michigan, with a large population of Arab descent.
Meanwhile, Israel itself is torn about what its goals are. The shame, of course, is that that self-examination doesn’t seem to enter the election debate.
##
TerryHSchwadron 