Biden's mismanagement of Israeli-Palestinian conflict

WHILE calling on Congress to support his efforts in the face of what he termed as two imminent threats, President Biden in his oddly brash White House speech, drew a connection between Russia's ongoing conflict in Ukraine and a surprise attack by Hamas on Israel. Against the backdrop of a deeply divided America, Biden urged citizens to broaden their perspective and rally behind essential foreign aid for American allies. The sweeping funding request, totaling an impressive $100 billion, includes a staggering $60 billion designated for the war-torn Ukraine and a substantial $10 billion for Israel. For obvious reasons, this request has set off a political firestorm as it now makes its way through the Senate and the Republican-led House, which has been without leadership for over two weeks. In his rare prime-time address, Biden aimed to establish a clear contrast with the isolationist stance embraced by many of his Republican counterparts, including former president Donald Trump, who have been a major opponent of extending military support abroad. Straddling both domestic and international fronts, the president fervently appealed to Americans to understand the urgency of providing assistance to the allies around the world. Does the Biden administration genuinely believe that offering unwavering support to Mr. Netanyahu will result in his exercising restraint? Are they under the impression that the extensive destruction in Gaza and the loss of thousands of lives will expedite the chances for regional peace? And, furthermore, does the administration truly think that Israel will achieve more success in this conflict than it did in the 2006 Lebanon war, the biannual confrontations with Hamas over the past 15 years, or, for that matter, than the United States did in its own experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq?

President Biden's decision last week to visit Israel amid the ongoing conflict with Hamas in Gaza, with plans to meet with several friendly Arab leaders, including Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Jordan immediately after his visit to Israel, appears to be a strategic move that faltered miserably due to his impulsive pro-Israeli attitude and questionable acceptance of Netanyahu's version on the explosion at Al Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza that killed over 500 people. From Biden's perspective, it was a well-timed stroke which could help bolster his domestic approval ratings because the current sentiments in the United States, where there is significant sympathy for Israel and a shared identification with Israelis as victims of Islamist extremism, particularly in the wake of the recent Hamas attacks in southern Israel. However, this decision carried some foreign policy risks -- and eventually it turned out to be a grave misstep. Biden could not have foreseen the tragic turn of events that coincided with his visit to Tel Aviv -- a sudden mass casualty incident. The blame game is in full swing, with both Israel and Palestinian groups pointing fingers at each other for the devastating loss of life. Western media and intelligence experts seem to be in agreement that it's too early to definitively determine responsibility. In fact, there is every possibility that this matter may remain elusive. In the broader Arab as well as Muslim world, the prevailing presumption, which is not likely to alter, is that Israel, amid its extensive bombardment of multiple targets in Gaza, including several civilian zones, must bear the responsibility. After all, throughout its previous engagements in Gaza and Lebanon, Israel has a history of either deliberately or inadvertently targeting hospitals, ambulances, refugee facilities, UN camps, and more. In such scenarios, there are scarcely any sanctuaries when the Israeli military is in pursuit of "restoring deterrence," a term that often serves as a euphemism for pursuing reprisals. As a result, President Biden had to abruptly cancel all his planned meetings with Arab leaders in Jordan, including his meeting with Mr. Abbas. This development has left him appearing isolated and somewhat misguided, rendering his trip a notable misjudgment in the realm of US diplomacy, notwithstanding any political advantages it may offer on the domestic front.