[[link removed]]

NETANYAHU IGNORED EVERY WARNING. NOW BIDEN IS TELLING ISRAEL:
‘ENOUGH IS ENOUGH’  
[[link removed]]


 

Alon Pinkas
May 9, 2024
Haaretz
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ With a shipment of some 3,500 bombs currently on halt, U.S.
President Joe Biden is sending a clear message to Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu about a ground operation in Rafah. Biden is sending
a clear and unequivocal message: enough is enough. _

Smoke rises after an Israeli strike in Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, on
Tuesday., Credit: Hatem Khaled/Reuters // Haaretz

 

The United States will not "isolate itself from the rest of the world
to stand behind Israeli intransigence," the president told his
secretary of state. The president in question was not Joe Biden and
the secretary of state is not Antony Blinken. Rather, it was President
Gerald Ford who said this to Henry Kissinger at the height of the
March 1975 "reassessment" crisis.

While trying to mediate an Israeli-Egyptian disengagement agreement
for Sinai, in the aftermath of 1973's Yom Kippur War, the Americans
encountered Israeli defiance, stalling and endless arguments. As a
result, the United States announced a "reassessment" of its Middle
East policy
[[link removed]],
which included delaying the supply of F-15 jets – at the time
Israel's would-be force-multiplier weapons platform.

The crisis setting is very different, relations between Israel and the
United States in 2024 are inherently different than in 1975. The
geopolitics are diametrically different. The international context is
patently different. But what President Biden said on Wednesday
[[link removed]] is,
in a limited way at this point, a "reassessment."

When the American president says in a CNN interview that the United
States will not supply Israel with offensive weapons to attack Rafah,
less than a week after putting on hold a major arms shipment of some
3,500 bombs, it is a reassessment by definition, by nature and by
design.

The question of whether this is a major shift or a symbolic warning
depends on Israel, not the United States. After months of deliberately
seeking an open confrontation with the Americans to serve his
political interests, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu finally got his
crisis – and immediately and predictably started to pontificate.

Since the March 1975 reassessment (which was reversed later that
year), the Americans have curtailed arms shipments to Israel several
times, including between December-February during the latest war in
Gaza. Those were very specific and temporary delays that were done
quietly and designed to send a message, but did not reflect negatively
on relations.

The uniqueness of the current decision
[[link removed]] is
its openness. The shipment on hold includes 1,800 2,000-pound bombs,
1,700 500-pound bombs and possibly JDAM kits – the joint direct
attack munition that converts unguided "dumb" bombs into guided
precision bombs. Simultaneously, in April Congress approved Biden's
request for a $14-billion emergency arms deal for Israel
[[link removed]],
and just last week authorized an $827-million munitions shipment.

 Since the March 1975 reassessment (which was reversed later that
year), the Americans have curtailed arms shipments to Israel several
times, including between December-February during the latest war in
Gaza.

Does this mean Biden's statement should be taken lightly or dismissed
as a momentary spasm caused by pressure from congressional Democrats?
Absolutely not.

The barrage of spin and clichés such as "This will pass," "When push
comes to shove, we're allies," "This is just symbolic" and "The GOP
loves us" is irrelevant and misguided. As long as Mr. Netanyahu is in
power, this will not pass.

The whining and wailing from Jerusalem could be heard across the
Atlantic in Washington. Israel is "deeply frustrated by the U.S.
decision," on top of "Israel is upset and furious by the U.S.
blindsiding it with the hostage/cease-fire deal" from three days
earlier. The frustration is understandable
[[link removed]];
the surprise is not.

Mr. Netanyahu was warned repeatedly but chose, as he always does, to
dismiss, deride or ignore the warnings and discreet messages. For
seven months he has deceived, manipulated, evaded, stalled and refused
to engage with the United States. He has shown nothing but crude
disregard for U.S. requests. Even when they may have been wrong, he
did not engage in a truthful dialogue and try to persuade them. He
just ignored or came out with defiant and incendiary statements.

From a U.S. point of view, irrespective of whether this decision
proves to be a symbolic one-off, Israel brought this on itself. This
is how it is perceived and interpreted in Washington: Israel has been
ignoring U.S. ideas and requests
[[link removed]] on
how to avoid civilian deaths in Gaza. Israel refuses to engage in a
dialogue with the Americans on postwar Gaza governance. Israel has
been employing tactics and munitions that caused unnecessary
destruction and a very high civilian casualty rate. Israel created a
humanitarian crisis that the United States has been criticized
severely for enabling.

Of course Israel has a different perspective and explanations. But to
pretend to be surprised by Biden's statement is disingenuous at best,
manipulative at worst.

 
A protester holding a placard depicting Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu and the inscription "Fascist," during a
pro-Palestinian rally in Paris on Tuesday.  (Credit: Julien de
Rosa/Agence France-Presse (AFP)  //  Haaretz)
Immediately after the United States confirmed that the arms shipment
has purposely been delayed, Mr. Netanyahu came out with a gem: this
decision will potentially "jeopardize negotiations to reach a hostage
deal
[[link removed]]."
He may as well have said the decision will adversely affect global
warming or the NBA playoffs.

The decision to halt the shipment was followed by Defense Secretary
Lloyd Austin's remarks that the United States will review "near-term
security assistance" to Israel in light of developments in Rafah. And
then Biden's CNN interview focused on Rafah. They directly linked a
policy revision to a potential Israeli attack on Rafah
[[link removed]].

It is worthwhile, therefore, delving into how the U.S. approach to
Rafah contrasts starkly to Israel's
[[link removed]].
Netanyahu, with extra pathos and sanctimony, portrayed Rafah as
Stalingrad in 1942-1943 or the Battle of the Bulge in 1944-1945. The
be-all and and-all of "total victory," and the eradication of Hamas.

By accusing Biden of stopping Israel on the precipice of victory,
Netanyahu is purposely implying that the president is preventing
Israel from toppling Hamas. That was his aim since October: to project
failure on either or both the Israel Defense Forces and the United
States.

The American evolution of thought on Rafah is more subtle and linked
to reality. It began with a simple question back in October: If Rafah
is Hamas' military center of gravity, along the 14-kilometer-long (8
mile) Philadelphi route stretching from Rafah in the southeast to the
Mediterranean in the northwest, then why didn't Israel begin the
campaign in the south instead of invading northern Gaza and Gaza City?
A three-star Marine general dispatched to advise Israel asked that
specific question as early as October. Defense Secretary Austin asked
that question again a few weeks later.

As the invasion of northern Gaza progressed, with thousands of
civilian deaths and widespread destruction, accompanied inevitably by
a humanitarian crisis, the United States began to question whether
Israel might do the same in Rafah. The Americans didn't object to
surgical, intelligence-driven, smaller operations, but cautioned
Israel again and again regarding a large-scale operation.

 
Palestinians fleeing Rafah on Thursday. )Credit: Mohammed
Salem/Reuters  //  Haaretz)
In the past few weeks, that warning was magnified as negotiations over
a hostage deal seemed to progress. But then Netanyahu came up with a
logical fallacy, declaring that "an operation in Rafah will be
launched with or without a cease-fire." That seemed to be too much for
the Biden administration.

The main criticism the United States has of Israel's prosecution of
the war isn't the civilian casualties or the devastation
[[link removed]],
but the total lack of clearly defined, coherent and attainable
political goals. The path to toppling Hamas is diplomatic, not an
onslaught on Rafah – however justified and sensible it may seem to
military planners.

With his decision to condition arms shipments subject to Israel's
Rafah policy, Biden is sending a clear and unequivocal message: enough
is enough.

* Joe Biden
[[link removed]]
* Benjamin Netanyahu
[[link removed]]
* Rafah
[[link removed]]
* Ceasefire
[[link removed]]
* Israel
[[link removed]]
* Gaza
[[link removed]]
* Palestine
[[link removed]]
* Israel-Gaza War
[[link removed]]
* Israel-Palestine
[[link removed]]
* Hostages
[[link removed]]
* Hamas
[[link removed]]
* IDF
[[link removed]]
* Genocide
[[link removed]]
* war crimes
[[link removed]]
* Occupied Territories
[[link removed]]
* starvation
[[link removed]]
* UNICEF
[[link removed]]
* U.S.-Israel relations
[[link removed]]
* U.S.-Israel military aid
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]