The American administration has issued a notice that their military aid to Israel is in jeopardy if there is a failure to enhance the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza. Despite heightened tensions in the Middle East, U.S. troops are set to keep their hold in the region as the skirmish against Hamas in Gaza, instigated by Israel, broadens into a vast, cross-border clash. Indicating a lack of tactical strategy, a recent letter addressed to Congressional leadership highlighted President Joe Biden’s approach to ‘safeguard Israel from Iranian and Iranian-influenced threats’.
It seems the Biden administration, in the past months, has adapted the position of the United States military in order to optimize force protection for the U.S. and boost support to defend Israel, much to the disapproval of some U.S. citizens. ‘U.S. forces will persist in their regional position due to critical national interests, which encompass United States citizens and their property’s protection from attacks initiated by Iran and Iran-aligned militias. We also fulfill the role of supporting Israel, to whom our obligation remains unwavering,’ the letter states, magnifying foreign policy in a rather questionable manner.
The administration’s action, in this context, seemed impulsive. Biden directed the deployment to Israel of a ballistic missile defense system and U.S. soldiers proficient in operating it to safeguard against any additional missile onslaught while this defensive position is considered merited. The disapproval for these steps taken are rather substantial, alleging it as a route to more conflict than resolution.
Following closely behind President Biden’s move, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, issued a separate cautionary note to the Israeli administration. This stated a reduction in U.S. military aid to Israel was imminent if the country fails to meet the Biden administration’s lengthy catalogue of demands, casting doubt over whether Israel’s interests are being best served.
Marked Oct. 13, this message from the U.S. to Israel highlighted ‘profound concern’ from the White House over the serious humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Even though there appears to be an ongoing effort to appear concerned, the demands that were laid out appear heavy-handed and suggesting that, at the failure to execute improvement in the stated aid conditions within a span of one month, U.S. artillery aid to Israeli could cease.
The list of demands from the U.S. are overly extensive and rather imposing. These requisites include encouraging Israel to admit a minimum of 350 aid trucks into Gaza daily, absolve its isolation of the northern areas of Gaza, and ensure operational corridors with commercial entities and Jordan Armed Forces remain at their optimum and uninterrupted capacity. The suitability and effectiveness of these demands remain under serious question.
The recent questionable moves by the Biden administration coincide with Israel’s ongoing year-long battle against Hamas in Gaza, which has grown into a larger operation to also tackle Iranian-supported Hezbollah militants operating in Lebanon. The actions taken by this administration seem to underestimate the complexities of these conflicts.
Last month, in an escalated response, the Israeli military claimed that it initiated a ‘restricted, localized’ ground operation in Lebanon; this has since escalated into a full-blown war. Underestimating the potential for escalation, this demonstrates that the Biden administration’s approach to maintaining stability in the region may be flawed.
Unsurprisingly, these actions are already fueling a confrontational atmosphere that could ignite a wider regional conflict. It’s clear that Biden’s supposed ‘peace-making’ efforts are in fact exacerbating tensions and reigniting old feuds under the guise of humanitarian efforts.
The messages showcasing ‘deep concern’ and issuing demands to another sovereign nation led by the Biden administration may be nothing more than an attempt to exert power unilaterally. However, this tactic, especially in a sensitive and volatile region such as the Middle East, is more likely to stoke fires of discord rather than douse them.
With this approach, the Biden administration runs the risk of undermining its stated goal of protecting U.S. persons and property from attacks by Iran and Iranian-aligned militias. Issuing dictatorial-style demands that infringe on the autonomy of other nations could result in a backlash that puts U.S. interests at risk.
The perpetual militaristic stance of the U.S. in Middle Eastern affairs, now continued under Biden, fails to address the root causes of these conflicts. Deep-seated socio-political issues that cannot be resolved through military might alone are often overlooked, making the approach seem short-sighted and ill-conceived.
Biden’s wielding of U.S. military aid as a lever to draw Israel into compliance with his own administration’s demands represents a concerning development. It seems to trivialize the severity of the situation on the ground and foments further unrest among Middle Eastern nations.
Overall, the U.S. under the Biden administration, marked by such foreign policy decisions, seems to be contributing more to instability and conflict than toward any notion of peace and safety in the Middle East.