It’s little secret that the Biden administration, including President Joe Biden himself, has become increasingly frustrated with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his country’s ongoing siege of the densely packed Gaza Strip.
While the White House had outwardly projected an image of unimpeachable and steadfast support for Israel in the immediate aftermath of Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack, the administration has infused their more recent public statements with pointed criticisms of the scale of violence and destruction being perpetrated against Palestinians.
In the past week alone, Biden claimed to have threatened Netanyahu with a “come to Jesus meeting” in a hot mic moment to a group of lawmakers, saying after realizing that his remarks were caught on tape, “good. That’s good.”
Netanyahu “knew what I meant by it,” Biden said Sunday in an interview with MSNBC, upping the geopolitical ante even further.
There is “no red line” where he would “cut off all weapons” so that Israel doesn’t “have the Iron Dome to protect them.” But, Biden stressed, there are “red lines” in Netanyahu’s proposal to invade the southern Gaza city of Rafah, declaring that “we cannot have 30,000 more Palestinians dead.”
Biden’s implication of a red line — contradictory and abstract as it may have seemed — and Netanyahu’s rejoinder insisting he’ll ensure “October 7 doesn’t happen again” mark a clear escalation in tensions. But are these red lines just bluster, or could there be actual consequences if they’re breached?
‘A new historical path’
The deaths of more than 100 Palestinians during a recent aid convoy into Gaza “marked a tipping point for U.S. officials,” which embodied “all of the points of concern long held by the White House,” Haaretz said.
While earlier friction between the countries has not resulted in any “realistic changes in the relationship” we might now be approaching a “moment where the U.S.-Israel relationship veers onto a new historical path.”
Biden’s “notable” focus on Israel’s Iron Dome defensive system comes as Israel is just weeks away from a March 25 deadline to “provide the Americans with written assurances that it will abide by international law while using U.S. weapons.”
Failure to meet that deadline, the paper said, could result in suspending offensive arms sales as “made clear by the national security memorandum Biden signed last month.”
Biden’s ambiguous red line comments mean the U.S. “needs to bring its policy in line with its rhetoric,” the Quincy Institute’s Responsible Statecraft said.
To prove that this isn’t an “empty threat,” the administration should be “spelling out to the Israeli government the specific benefits they stand to lose if they proceed,” including arms sales and protection at the United Nations.
Biden’s comments are part of a strategy to “break with Israel’s war strategy while proclaiming it still stands with Israel,” Jewish Insider said.
At the same time, efforts to mollify progressives have so far been “mostly symbolic,” seeing as Biden did “not make similar assurances about weapons that are not defensive.”
‘Dearborn strategy toward Israel’
Biden’s comments “can’t be separated from his desire to appease his party’s increasingly insistent anti-Israel wing,” The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board said.
It seems his Israel policy “increasingly runs through Dearborn, Mich.,” where Arab American voters spearheaded the growing “vote uncommitted” movement.
Ultimately, the appeasement only affirms that Hamas’ “strategy of putting civilians in harm’s way is working politically,” meaning that for Biden to “help himself politically” he must “let Israel win the war as rapidly as possible.”
Touting his own “red line” in response to Biden’s implied threat, Netanyahu has vowed to press ahead with an attack on Rafah, but was “careful in his criticism of his American counterpart,” Politico said, claiming the Israeli PM was “even more circumspect when asked whether he would prefer Republican candidate Donald Trump.”
Moreover, if Biden hoped to weaken Netanyahu’s standing in Israel, his criticism may have backfired, former Israeli ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren said to Jewish Insider.
Now, even as his domestic popularity fluctuates, “right-wing people who are disappointed with [Netanyahu] may now see him as standing up for Israel’s interests.”
LINK: Biden and Bibi duel with incompatible ‘red lines’ over Gaza (msn.com)
