Sanders withdraws progressive backing for Gaza ceasefire due to Hamas’ desire for ‘endless conflict
Sen. Bernie Sanders Opposes Permanent Ceasefire with Hamas, Citing Their Desire for “Permanent War”
During an interview on CBS This Morning, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) expressed his opposition to a permanent ceasefire between Israel and the Hamas terrorist group. He argued that Hamas has repeatedly stated their intention to destroy Israel and engage in “permanent war,” making a lasting ceasefire impossible.
This stance sets Sanders apart from many Democratic lawmakers, including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Jamaal Bowman, Rashida Tlaib, and Ilhan Omar, who have called for a permanent ceasefire. While Sanders supports efforts to free hostages held by Hamas, he believes that a permanent ceasefire is not the solution to the ongoing conflict in Gaza.
Israel’s Right to Defend Itself, Targeting Hamas, Not Palestinians
When asked about Israel’s justification for its war with Hamas, Sanders acknowledged Israel’s right to defend itself. However, he emphasized the importance of targeting Hamas specifically and not inflicting harm on the Palestinian people as a whole.
The debate surrounding a permanent ceasefire arises following a temporary one that occurred last month, resulting in the release of over 100 hostages. Nevertheless, there are still more than 100 hostages remaining captive in Gaza.
Click here to read more from The Washington Examiner.
Reports have also emerged suggesting that Hamas has sexually abused hostages taken during the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks. While the White House has not confirmed specific cases, National Security Council spokesman John Kirby stated that it is “safe to assume” that Hamas continues to use sexual violence as a weapon.
“It is a sick truth of this particular group that they use sexual violence as a weapon and a tool,” Kirby said. “That’s a matter of record, particularly since the seventh of October and the testimonies of some released hostages.”
What are Sen. Bernie Sanders’ security concerns regarding a permanent ceasefire between Israel and Hamas?
Security Concerns
Introduction Sen. Bernie Sanders, a prominent figure in American politics known for his progressive stances, has come out in opposition to the idea of a permanent ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. Citing security concerns as his primary motivation, Sanders has sparked a heated debate on the need for continued military operations in the region. This article aims to explore the reasoning behind Sanders’ opposition and shed light on the broader implications of his stance. Sanders’ Concerns Sen. Sanders, often a vocal critic of U.S. military interventions abroad, argues that a permanent ceasefire with Hamas without addressing the root causes of the conflict would be counterproductive. He fears that if a ceasefire were established without addressing the underlying issues, it could lead to further violence in the future. Sanders believes that a comprehensive resolution that includes addressing the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip, empowering moderate Palestinian leaders, and promoting a two-state solution is necessary to ensure a lasting peace. Security Implications Sanders’ concern for security stems from the historical context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In the past, temporary ceasefires have been rendered ineffective due to a lack of addressing core issues. This has resulted in sporadic outbreaks of violence, putting the lives of both Israelis and Palestinians in danger. Sanders believes that a comprehensive solution, even if it involves continued military operations, would be a more pragmatic approach in the long run. The Humanitarian Crisis The humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip is another factor driving Sanders’ opposition to a permanent ceasefire without a comprehensive resolution. He highlights the dire living conditions faced by the people of Gaza due to ongoing conflicts and the long-standing Israeli blockade. Sanders argues that any ceasefire agreement should include provisions to provide aid, improve infrastructure, and address the basic needs of the Gazan population. Without addressing these pressing issues, a permanent ceasefire alone would be insufficient and unlikely to bring lasting change. Implications of a Two-State Solution Sanders’ opposition to a permanent ceasefire also reflects his commitment to a two-state solution as the ultimate resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He believes that a ceasefire without progress towards a two-state solution could hinder the establishment of a future Palestinian state. Without clear guidelines and efforts towards creating an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel, Sanders fears the prolonged occupation and the consequent grievances may perpetuate violence in the future. Conclusion Sen. Bernie Sanders’ opposition to a permanent ceasefire with Hamas is rooted in his concerns for lasting security and the need for a comprehensive resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. His stance emphasizes the importance of addressing the humanitarian crisis and working towards a two-state solution. While his views have sparked debate, they serve as a reminder of the challenges faced when seeking to establish a lasting 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."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
