Anative of Louisiana, 17-year-old American Tawfiq Hafiz Ajjaq, was shot and killed by the Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) near the West Bank town of Al-Mazraa Al-Sharqiya on 21 January.
US officials quickly expressed their concern and called for an investigation – even though the murder of the unarmed teenager was caught on video. However, the US concern for the extra-judicial death did not carry with it a suspension of military assistance to Israel, nor a threat of doing so, nor even a rebuke of Israeli standard operating procedure in either Gaza or the West Bank.
Less than a week later, Washington suspended payment to the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) – which feeds almost all the 2.4 million population of Gaza – based on Israeli allegations that a baker’s dozen of the agency’s 11,000 employees were involved in the horrific 7 October attack on Israel.
The decision to suspend aid pending an investigation – not a warning, restrictions, or any other move that would not jeopardise the basic sustenance of the population of Gaza – represents yet another collective punishment of a beleaguered population that has already suffered 100,000 casualties.
It is entirely improper for Hamas activists to pose as humanitarian workers to support violence against civilians or military targets. The UN properly fired the accused persons, and it is appropriate for donors to expect and demand reforms to ensure that their money is used as intended to feed and provide essential life-sustaining services to the Palestinian population.
But let’s not be naïve about the realities of Gaza, or that fact that no reform is going to entirely eliminate the appeal of resistance to the Israeli occupation. This is true even if one concedes that Hamas fully intended to provoke a draconian Israeli response to mass bloodshed. Hamas understood full well that the battle it provoked was not about winning on the battlefield, but in the court of world public opinion.
I have not seen the alleged evidence Israel produced to Washington, the UN, and other donor nations. But the timing, just a day after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a preliminary ruling against Israel, seems a convenient way to change the narrative. It is entirely possible that the allegations are true and damning. But without a clear finding that they are true, such charges only stand to sway public opinion and result in considerable collective punishment – starvation above all else – of the people of Gaza.
The Biden administration’s decision, followed by other allies, to suspend support for UNRWA should be seen as a continuation of the one-sided stance Biden has held since the conflict began. Far from being the unbiased broker of peace the US proclaims itself to be, the world sees US perfidy on full display to the detriment of regional stability, Palestinian lives, and actual Israeli security.
There was minimal US reaction to the right-wing Israeli conference attended and led by several members of the Israeli Cabinet, thus suggesting official support for recolonising Gaza. Nor was there much said about subsequent Israeli government claims that post-conflict Gaza will include miliary occupation.
Are these actions of the government led by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu conducive to peace? Do they comply with international law? It should be little wonder to Washington why regional allies, and many other throughout the world, question US fairness and resolve.
Despite Biden’s insistence that he has warned Netanyahu repeatedly about the need to reduce civilian casualties in Gaza, deescalate the situation in the West Bank, operate within international law, provide humanitarian assistance to Gaza, wind down military operations, and prepare for a two-state solution, there have been little if any signs of Israeli restraint.
On the contrary, Netanyahu himself has openly rebuffed Biden on where the conflict is headed. He has explicitly stated, as is consistent with his long public record, his adamant opposition to a two-state solution.
The primary holdup to a ceasefire is Netanyahu himself. This is a man who has made a career of defying US calls for peace and reconciliation. This is a man who has seemingly downgraded the importance of the lives of Israeli hostages. Netanyahu’s entire political career is tied to conflict, and that career will end ignominiously once a ceasefire is imposed.
He is a political opportunist who only survives in conflict and would welcome the US sliding into a war with Iran, which neither Washington nor Tehran seemingly wants.
One cannot blame an opportunistic politician like Netanyahu for the continued carnage. Only Washington has the ability to pressure Israel to enter a ceasefire and goad it into a peace agreement that will ultimately serve the interests of all parties. Failing to demand a ceasefire was a mistake months ago, which Biden is now compounding with the recent UNRWA decision, especially with the conflict with Iranian proxies escalating across the region and having already cost several American lives.
It is an election year in the US, but make no mistake, should Biden lose to his competitor Donald Trump, the situation will only grow worse and the likelihood of a larger and uncontrollable regional conflict increase. It is time – past time – for Washington to demand a ceasefire. No one is suggesting that Biden harm Israeli interests, but those interests – the ability to live as a normal nation free from conflict or terror – do not include displacing the people of Gaza or causing untold numbers of additional casualties. Israel does not have the right under international law to ethnically cleanse Gaza.
Protests and demonstrations against Israel’s military actions in Gaza and the West Bank are not, as former US House speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested, fuelled by Russian or Chinese agents. There is plenty of outrage at what is unfolding in real time. By supporting Israel’s campaign, Biden is suffering considerable domestic political damage that could cost him the election.
While China and Russia may gain from Washington’s missteps, it is beyond insulting for US political leaders to brand those opposing Israeli policy as foreign agents. The bottom line is that the politics of the issue have changed in recent years, and no one can hide from what is unfolding on the ground.
The writer is executive director of the University of Central Florida Office of Global Perspectives & International Initiatives.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 8 February, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: