The close Israeli ally with whom America once shared key values no longer exists. The Israel that Joe Biden immediately came to defend on October 7 is a phantom, a reminder of a country that was a reliable friend of the US during the Cold War, a reliable defender of US national interests and an enemy of anti-American forces in the region.
It would make sense to offer the immediate and comprehensive support that Biden has offered to Israel in the wake of Hamas’s brutal terrorist attacks to that illusory Israel that he and many of us remember from the 1960s and 1970s.
But that Israel, as expressed through its government – the David of the region to the Arab Goliath that threatened it, a country that not only turned the desert green but nurtured democracy on soil that had not previously supported it had produced – is no longer real. Therefore, Biden’s response was too robust. This made the United States act as a full partner in whatever Israel would do in response to these attacks. Worse, for many it ushered in an era in which Israel was seen as a US proxy and its actions were seen as a direct continuation of US foreign policy. (I should add that relations between the people of the United States and those of Israel remain, as they should, largely unchanged.)
As I wrote at the time, such an attitude carries significant risks. Giving Benjamin Netanyahu’s government carte blanche (or appearing to do so, even though he has also issued warnings and cautionary statements) would inevitably result in America being blamed for what will surely be brutal Israeli tactics in Gaza, and later to deep tensions in relations between Washington and Jerusalem.
That’s exactly what happened – with all the international and domestic political consequences that such a misjudgment would entail. However, it is also becoming increasingly clear that there may be some positive aspects to the way President Biden has handled this crisis.
The current Israeli government does not share close values with the United States
Netanyahu and his coalition have repeatedly shown authoritarian tendencies and attempted to weaken existing democracy in Israel. They have exacerbated apartheid policies that have made second-class citizens of many Palestinians living within Israeli-controlled borders, and they have actively worsened the treatment of those Palestinians in both the West Bank and Gaza.
They have also actively distanced themselves from US foreign policy goals in Ukraine. In addition, Netanyahu has warmly welcomed key opponents of America’s policies and its true allies – Vladimir Putin in Russia, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Recep Tayyeb Erdogan in Turkey, Xi Jinping in China and the far right across Europe.
In the United States, Netanyahu’s government has been even less allied, if that is possible. She openly rejected the positions of an entire political party in the US, the Democrats, and actively joined the MAGA Republicans.
Given the ebb and flow of U.S. politics, true allies would be wise to try to remain impartial. Netanyahu decided he would like to try to influence this ebb and flow.
Netanyahu has proven time and time again to be unreliable. He has often lied to U.S. leaders and the American people. And the latest cabinet he has assembled is full of truly despicable characters, former terrorists, Israeli nationalist extremists, racists – even some with a penchant for genocide.
Given all this, it was not difficult to see that Netanyahu would be a poor partner in any operations that would take place after the October 7 terrorist attacks. The fact that he was also blamed by the majority of Israelis for these attacks – and the fact that it was (and is) widely believed that his political career could end as soon as military operations in Gaza ceased – also created incentives for him to Prolonging the fighting was in direct conflict with U.S. interests.
Still, U.S. support for the Netanyahu government was too broad, even as Biden tried to couch his support for Netanyahu in reservations about Israeli behavior in Gaza and in sound exhortations that Israel should not make the same mistakes it made after 9/11 , to express. We promised to give them whatever military and economic assistance they needed. Biden and some on his team even welcomed Israeli propaganda that overstated the care with which Israel waged its war in Gaza and minimized the costs of that war.
Now the enormous toll this war took is largely attributed to both Israel and the United States. Many thousands of innocent Palestinians are dead. According to credible estimates, almost 15,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, have already died. In fact, according to a recent Axios article, the number of casualties “could exceed that of other conflict zones in the 21st century.” Large parts of the Gaza Strip are destroyed and uninhabitable. The cost of reconstruction will be billions and billions.
Furthermore, the increasing devastation and human suffering in Gaza is leading to ever-increasing tensions between Israel and the US and, reportedly, even heated debates within the US government itself.
There are a growing number of people in the president’s own party who are dissatisfied with aspects of his policies, even though polls show the vast majority of Democrats (and the majority of Americans) still support them.
However, Biden’s unwavering support of Israel has made him enormously popular in that country and given him great political influence. In fact, this, combined with his “bear hug” approach, has given him significantly more influence over the Israeli leadership than he might have had otherwise.
Biden has used this influence to directly and significantly reduce the human cost of war. Biden and his team led efforts to prioritize the release of the Hamas hostages. Biden and his team have consistently committed to providing ever-increasing amounts of humanitarian aid to Gaza. And Biden and his team are actively pushing (both publicly and privately) for Israeli restraint in its operations in Gaza and advocating more targeted tactics.
Furthermore, being close to Israel has given Biden the ability to advocate for outcomes that have fallen out of fashion. Just a few months ago, many scoffed at the idea that a two-state solution was even plausible as a solution to the tensions between Israel and Palestine. Today, as advocated by Biden and his team, it is once again seen as the only possible lasting path to peace in the region. This is a profound change.
None of these things could have been achieved as effectively if Biden had taken a different course. So far it is impossible to weigh their relative benefits against the costs of war. But knowing Israel’s past actions and the views of its prime minister and cabinet, it is fair to assume that the devastation in Gaza would have been even greater under a different U.S. policy or president. Biden’s team has even made clear that an approach more similar to that of Biden’s former boss, President Barack Obama, would have resulted in the U.S. having less influence.
There is no denying that former President Donald Trump would not have offered checks on his friend Netanyahu’s plans and that the damage would have been much greater under a Trump administration. In fact, the notoriously Islamophobic 45th US President probably would have egged Bibi on.
So for now, we’re left speculating about what might have been under a different president and a Biden policy that was both crazy and clever. The final verdict on whether Biden’s approach worked, despite all the misjudgments, will lie in the coming weeks.
Can more hostages be released? Can the ceasefire be extended? Can the ceasefire period be used to better formulate the final results and end the war sooner rather than later? Will Israel be more targeted in its efforts to dismantle Hamas?
When Netanyahu is out of office in a few months, Hamas is gone, and a process develops that could lead to a lasting political solution – and free and safe homes for Israelis and Palestinians – we can look back and highlight the positives of Biden Dealing with this terrible situation. If Bibi manages to retain his power and ultimately impose his brutal will on Palestine – or his tactics lead to a resurgence of Hamas and other opponents of Israel – we will have a very different view.
Which ultimately reminds us that dealing with crises like this is a complex matter where the consequences of certain measures are often unclear. Therefore, neither a position nor a particular tactic can necessarily define a longer-term approach.
You can start with a misstep or a wrong emphasis and still end with a comparatively positive outcome – if you learn from those mistakes instead of denying them. Based on his many years of experience, Biden knows and lives this every day. Tragically, it will not bring back the lives lost on both sides of this war. But perhaps it will save precious lives in the years and decades to come.