On Sunday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin sent a letter to Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer, demanding that Israel authorize critical humanitarian aid to Gaza. The United States gave Israel 30 days to comply with American law. If it does not act, the letter suggests, Israel could face sanctions, including potentially stopping U.S. arms transfers.
It remains to be seen whether this is a serious attempt by the United States to get Israel to change course in Gaza. Over the past year, Israel has mostly ignored U.S. recommendations, with Washington repeatedly choosing not to take significant action in response.
What then should we make of the American letter, which was leaked to the media shortly after its delivery to Gallant and Dermer?
The “general’s plan”
It is impossible not to read the letter with cynicism.
First, it was written on the heels of the publication of the “General’s Plan”, authored by former Israeli national security adviser Giora Eiland, which calls on Israel to block all aid to northern Gaza, to starve everyone and ethnically cleanse the territory.
In recent days, it has become clear that this “General Plan” has already been adopted and is working as intended. During the first two weeks of October, virtually no aid was provided to the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians besieged by Israel in northern Gaza.
The release of the plan embarrassed the US administration, which has repeatedly advised Israel to adhere to international law.
The American presidential election
There are other, more compelling reasons to view the Blinken-Austin letter with cynicism. The US election is fast approaching and President Joe Biden’s administration is desperate for Vice President Kamala Harris to win against her Republican rival, former President Donald Trump. While polls show the two candidates neck and neck, the several million votes of Arab and Muslim Americans, pro-Palestinian college students and others who want to end Israel’s violations of international law, especially in swing states, are more valuable to the current administration than ever before.
Read in this light, the letter appears to be a last-ditch attempt to save the election. Harris may now be lamenting her public censorship of pro-Palestinian Americans as well as the decision not to allow a Palestinian speaker to take the main stage at the Democratic National Convention in August. In recent days, the Democratic presidential candidate has worked to court Arab and Muslim American voters. The Blinken/Austin letter, which the administration must have known would be released to the public, is another attempt to convince voters.
A shield against allegations of genocide
The letter from Blinken and Austin can also be read as an attempt by the Biden administration to cover its own back and protect itself against allegations of complicity in genocide. Of course, the administration continues to fund Israel’s genocide and provide diplomatic cover, but now, if it ever has to excuse its behavior, it can point to this letter and say that it at least gave Israel a serious warning.
Of course, the letter could eventually prove to be a strategic mistake since, like Biden’s many previous reprimands of Israel, it reads more like an acknowledgment of ongoing Israeli war crimes than an actual warning.
For example, in their letter to Gallant and Dermer, Blinken and Austin order Israel to cancel “evacuation orders when there is no operational need.” This appears to be an acknowledgment that Israel has forcibly displaced Palestinians, which constitutes a serious war crime. Since the start of the war, rights groups have documented numerous cases of forced displacement.
If the United States knows that Israel is committing crimes, then it cannot justify its continued support and involvement in Israel’s war, which begs the question: what does it know about Israel’s apparent policy of starving the population of Gaza?
It is unthinkable that the United States knows less about Israel’s famine policy than the academics, humanitarian groups, international organizations and other experts who have been writing about them for more than a year. Moreover, Israeli leaders themselves have admitted and proudly announced such policies on several occasions.
For example, on October 8, 2023, just one day after the start of the war, Gallant publicly admitted to ordering a “complete siege” of the Gaza Strip. “There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel. Everything is closed,” he said. “We fight human animals and we act accordingly. ” A few weeks later, in November, Eiland, the aforementioned author of “The General’s Plan,” asserted that Israel’s war must be waged against “the entire population of Gaza” and that the Israeli army must seek to create a “humanitarian disaster”, including famine. and “serious epidemics”. This, he argued, would “bring victory closer.” Eiland also stressed that the Israeli military should not only seek to “kill more Hamas fighters” but also cause “irreversible damage to their families” as well as “hospital and school directors.”
From the start of this “war”, it should therefore have been obvious to the Biden administration that Israel was using food as a weapon against the population of Gaza. This means that, almost from day one, international law and the U.S. Leahy Act demanded that the United States withdraw aid to Israel. In this context, Blinken and Austin sending a warning letter to the Israeli government a year after the start of a genocide seems tragically absurd.
The US government would undoubtedly deny knowledge of any forced starvation program and point to its past claims of ignorance. A recent report from investigative media ProPublica, however, complicates things for the United States.
Three weeks ago, ProPublica revealed that Blinken knew about and ignored a U.S. government report that Israel was blocking critical U.S. humanitarian aid to Gaza.
It appears Blinken was less than truthful when he told Congress in May that the U.S. government “does not currently assess that the Israeli government is prohibiting or otherwise restricting the transportation or delivery of aid.” American humanitarian.
A diversion
Blinken-Austin’s letter to Gallant and Dermer also highlights U.S. efforts to distract from other, even more serious Israeli violations. Throughout the war on Gaza, the United States has spoken of the need to provide humanitarian aid to the civilian population. During ceasefire negotiations, the United States often highlighted the issue of humanitarian aid.
But this insistence is clearly not motivated by concern for the well-being of the Palestinians. Rather, it was a diversion from Israel’s deliberate bombing of children, women and other non-combatants. These war crimes are more serious, better documented, and, given that the United States supplies Israel with most of its weapons, are more likely to put the United States at direct risk of complicity in genocide.
Despite being aware of targeted attacks on civilians, the United States continued to supply Israel with billions of dollars in weapons, including 900 kg (2,000 pounds) bombs used to devastate entire neighborhoods. The U.S. emphasis on humanitarian aid appears to be a strategic choice, allowing America to appear to be taking action without actually pushing for an end to the war. A critical focus on Israel’s illegal bombing campaign would require reconsidering U.S. support.
Ultimately, history will remember that Israel committed genocide in Gaza, with the complicity of the United States. No forcefully worded letter or other performative gesture can change this dark reality.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Tel Aviv Tribune.