Biden’s focus on appeasing radical Democrats risks abandoning allies abroad
Since the Hamas barbarism of Oct. 7, the Biden administration has been torn on its response. In the immediate aftermath of the attack that killed more than 1,000 Israelis, plus more than 30 American citizens, and led to the kidnapping of hundreds more, the White House talked a big game in support of Israel’s right to defend itself.
American carrier groups were sent to the region, the administration’s rhetorical backing was strong (especially from National Security Council spokesman John Kirby), and Israel’s war plans were largely met with American approval, if tepidly. But as the leftist chorus against Israel’s righteous war on Hamas has grown louder and more belligerent, including constant false and malicious accusations of genocide, the White House has begun to shift course.
Angry pro-Palestinian protests have been taking over cities and campuses across the country since last October, with their bellicosity only increasing over time. They have attempted to shut down traffic in New York City, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles, among others. They have engaged in vile antisemitic chants, attacked pro-Israel counter-demonstrators, and carried posters with genocidal imagery and messages. Jews, Zionists, and their supporters have been assailed in the streets with little in the way of police protection or legal action. Some of these assaults have led to significant injuries or even death.
The Biden administration itself has been targeted by these violent protests, as has Congress, but instead of steeling the White House in support of Israel, they have eroded its already weak resolve. The progressive activists who lead this movement have disproportionate influence in the Biden administration and the media, populating the federal bureaucracy and serving as the leading indicator of the views of the Democratic base.
The White House has consistently sought to de-escalate conflict before the November election, seeing ongoing U.S. involvement in global wars as a major negative electorally. This explains the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan, the slow-walking of congressionally approved aid to Ukraine, and the inability to properly deter the Houthi militants who are attacking neutral shipping in the Red Sea.
But the greatest danger to Biden’s reelection is on the hot-button issue of Israel, as his base voters increasingly see the Jewish state as an illegitimate settler colonial project. Biden’s lukewarm support in the war’s early stages infuriated these voters, something the administration has been seeking to reverse ever since. They have sent delegations to the battleground state of Michigan, which has a large Muslim population, to show that they are sensitive to the concerns of Arab-Americans who support the Palestinian cause. Those activists were still unhappy with the outcome, as the White House did not come out fully in agreement with their pro-Hamas bent.
Since then, a more concerning development has appeared for the administration: a powerful statement from black church leaders decrying Israel’s just war as “mass genocide” and seeking to end all aid to our ally. As the Democrat Party relies far more heavily on African-American voters than it does the smaller Muslim population, this is a direct challenge to the president’s campaign. And the White House has surely acted like it, ramping up its anti-Israel efforts.
Administration Seeking to Accommodate
To earn the approval of these critical domestic constituencies, the Biden team has focused its efforts in the Middle East not on aiding Israel in its quest to destroy Hamas — an Iranian-backed terror militia that seeks the total destruction of the Jewish state — but on achieving various so-called “humanitarian pauses” and ensuring the war does not widen in scope. Administration diplomats ranging from special envoys to the secretary of state have been traveling around the Middle East, seeking to accommodate Arab opinion and mollify the Iranian regime enough to avoid broader conflict.
The White House has used Qatar, a nation the Biden team has designated as a key non-NATO ally, as a cutout to negotiate with Hamas on hostage issues, but this approach has not borne fruit. In fact, Qatar is one of the primary sponsors of Hamas — much of the terror group’s leadership resides permanently in Doha — and its “mediation” has utterly failed to secure hostage releases or even the delivery of medication to Israelis held captive for months.
The White House has also moved in a profoundly anti-Israel direction at the United Nations. It did recently veto a Security Council resolution that would have labeled Israel’s fight immoral and tried to force an immediate and permanent ceasefire. But that veto came at the same time as the administration proposed its own ceasefire resolution urging a “temporary” pause and strongly admonishing Israel against going into Rafah, the last stronghold of Hamas.
This is meant to seem on the surface like a more pro-Israel idea, but it serves the exact same purpose: ensuring that Israel does not win this war. Israel must go into Rafah if it seeks to achieve its aim of destroying Hamas permanently as a danger to the nation. It has already shown that Hamas is keeping hostages in the city, rescuing two in a daring operation just the other week. Allowing Hamas to remain untouched in Rafah would mean that the terror group would win this war, despite its serious material and manpower losses. And that is an unacceptable outcome for the Israeli public and political class, which nearly uniformly supports the war on Hamas.
Two-State Solution Won’t Work
Most concerningly, the White House, along with European allies, has pushed for the recognition of a Palestinian state after the conclusion of the war. Israel has agreed to the creation of a Palestinian state multiple times over the past 75 years, all of which were rejected by Palestinian leadership and met with waves of violence.
After the events of Oct. 7, Israelis by and large oppose the fabled “two-state solution,” regardless of where they fall on the political spectrum. This is an eminently reasonable position given that a majority of Palestinians support the Hamas atrocities and would likely vote for the terrorist group in elections (as they did in Gaza in 2006). The recognition of “Palestine” so soon after the mass murder of Israeli civilians would only reward barbarism and entrench Palestinian intransigence and violence as the national founding mythos.
None of these actions support American interests abroad. They directly harm our greatest ally in the region, embolden Iran in its campaign against American power, and alienate those whom we should be seeking closer ties with. The purposeful sacrifice of our national interests and those of our close ally at the altar of progressivism is a dereliction of duty. As November nears, this will only become worse. The majority of Americans who support Israel in its war must demand better and vote accordingly.
rnrn
What are some fundamental issues that the two-state solution fails to address in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
With other prominent members of the Biden administration, has been advocating for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While this may seem like a reasonable and diplomatic approach, it ignores the inherent flaws and complexities of the situation.
The idea of a two-state solution, which calls for the creation of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel, has been discussed for decades. However, it fails to address many fundamental issues that have plagued peace negotiations in the past. These include the status of Jerusalem, the right of return for Palestinian refugees, and the security concerns of both parties.
Firstly, Jerusalem holds great religious and historical significance for both Israelis and Palestinians. It has always been a contentious issue, with both sides claiming it as their capital. Any attempt to divide the city between two states would inevitably lead to further disputes and conflicts.
Secondly, the right of return for Palestinian refugees is a deeply sensitive and complicated issue. Millions of Palestinians live in refugee camps in neighboring countries, longing to return to their ancestral homes in what is now Israel. However, granting this right to all Palestinian refugees would significantly alter the demographic makeup of Israel, potentially diluting its Jewish identity and creating internal tensions.
Furthermore, ensuring the security of both Israelis and Palestinians is crucial for any lasting peace agreement. Israel has legitimate concerns about its national security, given the ongoing threats and attacks it faces from Hamas and other militant groups. Implementing a two-state solution without addressing these security concerns would leave Israel vulnerable to future attacks.
Instead of blindly pushing for a two-state solution, the Biden administration should focus on fostering dialogue and understanding between Israelis and Palestinians. This could involve encouraging economic cooperation, promoting cultural exchanges, and supporting grassroots peace initiatives.
Moreover, it is important to acknowledge the role played by extremist elements in hindering the pursuit of peace. Hamas, recognized as a terrorist organization by numerous countries, openly calls for the destruction of Israel. This poses a significant obstacle to any genuine peace process and must be addressed forcefully by the international community.
Ultimately, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a deeply complex and multifaceted issue that requires a nuanced and realistic approach. While a two-state solution may seem like an ideal solution on the surface, it overlooks the complexities and challenges inherent in the situation. Instead, it is necessary to promote dialogue, address security concerns, and confront extremist elements in order to pave the way for a lasting and sustainable peace in the region.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
