Middle East and North Africa

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Three US service members killed in ‘despicable’ drone attack in Jordan, Biden says

      by

      The spectre of a direct US-Iranian military conflict drew closer on Sunday when the US president Joe Biden announced three US servicemen have been killed and more than 34 injured following a drone attack on a US service base on the border of Jordan and Syria. Biden blamed Iranian backed militia mainly based in Iraq for the “despicable” attack and vowed revenge.Responsibility for Saturday’s attack on Tower 22, a military outpost on the Jordanian Syrian Iraqi borders was claimed by the Iranian backed umbrella group Islamic Resistance, and the US made no attempt to disguise its belief that Iran was ultimately responsible.Four separate drone strikes had been fired at three US bases, and the US was investigating why the T-22 base’s defence mechanism did not repel the drone. Many of the American servicemen wounded have suffered traumatic brain injury, but the extent of injuries has not been disclosed. An official said the drone struck near the barracks early in the morning, which would explain the high number of casualties.US forces have faced a near-daily barrage of drone and missile strikes in Iraq and Syria since the 7 October attack on Israel by Hamas, but this incident draws the US much closer to a direct conflict with Iran, an outcome both sides insist they wish to avoid, but may now be unable to prevent as the incidents proliferate and escalate in impact.It is the first time American military personnel have been killed by hostile fire in the Middle East since the start of the Israel-Hamas war on 7 October, although two US Navy Seals drowned on 11 January off the coast of Somalia as they intercepted a Dhow carrying Iranian weapons bound for Houthi rebels in Yemen.The Islamic Resistance in Iraq, an umbrella group that claimed responsibility for the deaths at T-22, includes Kata’ib Hezbollah group, which fought against coalition forces in Iraq.The Iranian backed groups have long been trying to drive the US troops out of Iraq and Syria, but have used the war in Gaza as the backdrop to intensify these efforts and broaden the battleground.The US says its 900 troops in Syria are working alongside Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces to defeat Islamic State, the extremist Sunni group. It has about 4,000 troops in Jordan.In a statement Biden pointedly said the US will hold all those responsible to account at a time of the US choosing, and the US Pentagon made no attempt to disguise its belief that Iran is ultimately behind the attacks.Breaking the news, Biden in a statement said: “Today, America’s heart is heavy. Last night, three US service members were killed – and many wounded–during an unmanned aerial drone attack on our forces stationed in north-east Jordan near the Syria border.He added: “While we are still gathering the facts of this attack, we know it was carried out by radical Iran-backed militant groups operating in Syria and Iraq.He vowed: “We will carry on their commitment to fight terrorism. And have no doubt – we will hold all those responsible to account at a time and in a manner our choosing”.Islamic Resistance released a statement saying, “As we said before, if the US keeps supporting Israel, there will be escalations. All the US interests in the region are legitimate targets and we don’t care about US threats to respond, we know the direction we are taking and martyrdom is our prize.”Charles Lister, senior fellow at the Middle East Institute and long-time Syria expert said: “it is a huge escalation and what everyone has been worrying about”. He added “if there is not a truly decisive response to this, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps will feel wholly emboldened. This is the 180th attack since Oct 18 – it must be responded to as the game-changer that it is.”Jordan initially denied the attack occurred on its soil, and later said it took place on the border, in an indication that it does not want to become embroiled in any coming conflict.In a statement, the country condemned the “terrorist attack”, while a senior Jordanian security source told Reuters it had previously appealed to the US for air defence systems and technology to tackle drones.Washington has given Jordan around $1bn to bolster border security since Syria’s civil war began in 2011, and has recently sent more military aid to that end.In a previously recorded interview with ABC News that aired Sunday morning, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen CQ Brown said part of the US’s work is to “make sure as things have happened in the Middle East is not to have the conflict broaden”.“The goal is to deter them and we don’t want to go down a path of greater escalation that drives to a much broader conflict within the region,” he said.Republican opponents of Biden seized on the attack as evidence of the Democratic president’s failure to confront Iran as its proxies strike against US forces across the region.“The only answer to these attacks must be devastating military retaliation against Iran’s terrorist forces … Anything less will confirm Joe Biden as a coward,” said Republican senator Tom Cotton in a statement.Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, called on Biden to “exercise American strength to compel Iran to change its behaviour”; Florida senator Rick Scott said Iran was “blatantly questioning US strength and resolve”.Democrats also joined the calls for action. “Every single malignant actor responsible must be held accountable,” Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, said.A senior official with the Iran-backed Palestinian militant group Hamas, Sami Abu Zuhri, directly tied the attack to Israel’s campaign in Gaza.“The killing of three American soldiers is a message to the US administration that unless the killing of innocents in Gaza stops, it must confront the entire nation,” he told Reuters.“The continued American-Zionist aggression on Gaza is capable of exploding the situation in the region.” More

    • 213 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      US insists it’s trying to get aid into Gaza as UN warns millions ‘at risk of famine’

      by

      The US claims it is working “relentlessly” to get humanitarian aid into Gaza amid UN warnings that the territory’s 2.2 million people are “highly food insecure and at risk of famine”.Antony Blinken, speaking at Davos this week, called the situation in Gaza “gut-wrenching”. But the US secretary of state was unable to secure any major new gains on increasing the amount of assistance entering the territory during his recent visit to Israel, even as leaders of international organizations advocate for urgent access.United Nations special rapporteurs said this week that “every single person in Gaza is hungry” and that “Israel is destroying Gaza’s food system and using food as a weapon against the Palestinian people”. Israeli inspections have slowed the aid entering the territory, which is receiving just a tiny fraction of what experts say is needed.After months of backroom advocacy with Israel to increase the flow of food and humanitarian items through the south of Gaza, the US is “focused on trying to see what we can do to increase the volume and the speed with which those trucks are getting in”, according to the White House spokesperson John Kirby.Israel has allowed just under 8,500 trucks to enter Gaza through the two southern crossings over the past 85 days, according to the UN’s monitoring – an average of 100 trucks a day. Aid groups say 500 trucks a day are needed at minimum. “Everyone understands the need for inspections, but things like antibiotics or tent poles or sleeping bags with zippers are causing delay and rejection, and then the whole trucks – not just the items in question – are turned away,” Tom Hart, the CEO of the humanitarian group InterAction, said.“We need approval and inspection processes for aid to be faster and more efficient and more predictable,” Ricardo Pires, a communications manager with Unicef, said.The Biden administration credited its pressure on Israel for what has got into Gaza so far. “Despite the fact that what’s getting in isn’t sufficient to the needs right now, it is the United States that got anything in, in the first place,” Matt Miller, the state department spokesperson, has said.Some aid groups see things differently. “We know that they are doing a lot behind the scenes, but at the moment we are not seeing the results of what they are doing in the access and distribution of assistance on the ground,” Hart said.David Satterfield, the retired ambassador working as a state department humanitarian envoy focused on Gaza, has faced criticism for his effectiveness in the role. He joined Blinken on part of his recent Israel trip, though Satterfield had previously been on vacation and working remotely in Hawaii, where he owns property, over the holidays. “This was a long-planned vacation that was coordinated, and he immediately went back to Israel after that,” a state department spokesperson told the Guardian.“People in Gaza risk dying of hunger just miles from trucks filled with food,” Cindy McCain, executive director of the WFP, said in a statement. “Every hour lost puts countless lives at risk. We can keep famine at bay but only if we can deliver sufficient supplies and have safe access to everyone in need, wherever they are.”Some legislators have called on the Biden administration to do more, though a Senate vote which would require additional safeguards on aid to Israel only garnered 11 votes on Tuesday night, nowhere near the simple majority needed in the 100-person chamber to pass.Senator Chris Van Hollen voted in favor of the resolution, which was introduced by Bernie Sanders, after visiting the Rafah crossing that borders Egypt earlier in the month. Van Hollen called the Israeli government’s delays in inspecting trucks “purely arbitrary” in an interview with the New Yorker.An Israeli military spokesperson recently denied outright that there is hunger in Gaza, even as Human Rights Watch said last month that “the Israeli government is using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare”.In the absence of a ceasefire, it’s not clear whether a large influx of humanitarian aid could even be distributed effectively. The issue is not just getting into Gaza, but the safety and logistics once inside the territory. Electricity and communications blackouts, along with Israeli bombardments, make distribution dangerous and at times impossible. It’s likely in part for these reasons that the heads of the World Food Programme and Unicef, both of which were appointed to those roles by Joe Biden, have called for a ceasefire.But experts say that the US is more focused on the humanitarian crisis than the underlying political and military roots of the conflict. “They are in the weeds on humanitarian access issues, which is still uncomfortable for the Israelis, but far preferable to questions of ceasefire and future political arrangements, and it allows Israel to nickel-and-dime the US to death on the minutiae,” Daniel Levy, president of the US/Middle East Project, says.Tania Hary, executive director of the Israeli non-profit Gisha focused on movement and access for Palestinians, says that Israel is facing more pressure to let more goods into Gaza in part because of South Africa’s international court of justice case at the Hague. But she added, “I don’t think that they’re doing enough or that they’re moving fast enough, and they’re not even skimming the surface of their obligations to Gaza residents.”The US has found some creative pathways in its humanitarian efforts, including getting Israel to reopen the Kerem Shalom crossing on the southern Israel-Gaza border in mid-December. But in Hary’s assessment, those actions remain wholly insufficient. “We’re never going to see these needs being addressed without there being a ceasefire, and the US is of course not calling for that. So whatever it is trying to do on access for aid is undermined by support for the continued military operation,” she said.Kirby, the White House spokesperson, acknowledged that “a big hindrance” to getting more humanitarian items into Gaza “is the fighting itself”.Though the US Senate failed to pass the measure to condition military aid to Israel based on the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, advocates say there are other means available to the US within that law. For example, it contains a clause that bars security assistance when the recipient country “prohibits or otherwise restricts, directly or indirectly, the transport or delivery of United States humanitarian assistance”, a point that a consortium of NGOs highlighted in a recent letter to the US defense secretary.“Israel as the occupying power and a side to the hostilities has obligations, not just to facilitate entry of goods but even to supply them,” Hary says. “And almost no one is talking about Israel supplying the food that Gaza needs, but that is its obligation.” More

    • 113 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Unacceptable’: Biden denounced for bypassing Congress over Yemen strikes

      by

      A bipartisan chorus of lawmakers assailed Joe Biden for failing to seek congressional approval before authorizing military strikes against targets in Yemen controlled by Iranian-backed Houthi militants, reigniting a long-simmering debate over who has the power to declare war in America.The US president announced on Thursday night that the US and the UK, with support from Australia, Canada, the Netherlands and Bahrain, had launched a series of air and naval strikes on more than a dozen sites in Yemen. The retaliatory action was in response to relentless Houthi attacks against commercial shipping in the Red Sea since the start of Israel’s war in Gaza.“This is an unacceptable violation of the constitution,” said Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal, a Washington Democrat and the chair of the Progressive Caucus. “Article 1 requires that military action be authorized by Congress.”Biden, who served 36 years in the Senate, including as chair of the foreign relations committee, notified Congress but did not request its approval.“These strikes are in direct response to unprecedented Houthi attacks against international maritime vessels in the Red Sea – including the use of anti-ship ballistic missiles for the first time in history,” Biden said in a statement. “These attacks have endangered US personnel, civilian mariners, and our partners, jeopardized trade, and threatened freedom of navigation.”The escalation of American action came days after the Houthis launched one of their biggest salvoes to date, in defiance of warnings from the Biden administration and several international allies who implored the rebel group to cease its attacks or prepare to “bear the responsibility of the consequences”.Several lawmakers applauded the strikes, arguing they were necessary to deter Iran. In a statement, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, called Biden’s decision “overdue”.“The United States and our allies must leave no room to doubt that the days of unanswered terrorist aggression are over,” he said.Congressman Gregory Meeks, the ranking Democrat on the House foreign affairs committee, said he supported the decision to launch “targeted, proportional military strikes”, but called on the Biden administration to “continue its diplomatic efforts to avoid escalation to a broader regional war and continue to engage Congress on the details of its strategy and legal basis as required by law”.Yet many progressive – and a number of conservative – members were furious with the president for failing to seek approval from Congress.“Unacceptable,” wrote Ayanna Pressley, a Massachusetts Democrat.Mark Pocan, a Wisconsin Democrat, wrote: “The United States cannot risk getting entangled into another decades-long conflict without congressional authorization.”He called on Biden to engage with Congress “before continuing these airstrikes in Yemen”.Ro Khanna, a California progressive who has led bipartisan efforts to reassert congressional authority over America’s foreign wars, said on X: “The president needs to come to Congress before launching a strike against the Houthis in Yemen and involving us in another Middle East conflict.”He pointed to article 1 of the constitution, vowing to “stand up for that regardless of whether a Democrat or Republican is in the White House”.Khanna has also led a years-long pressure campaign to end American support for Saudi Arabia’s devastating military offensive in Yemen. Biden said the US would end its support in 2021.Reacting to calls by Saudi Arabia for restraint and “avoiding escalation” in light of the American-led air strikes, Khanna added: “If you had told me on January 20 2021 that Biden would be ordering military strikes on the Houthis without congressional approval while the Saudis would be calling for restraint and de-escalation in Yemen, I would never have believed it.”Khanna’s dismay was shared by a number of House Republicans, including the far-right congressman Matt Gaetz of Florida and the arch-conservative senator Mike Lee of Utah.At the heart of Khanna’s criticism is a decades-long debate between the legislative and executive branches over Congress’s constitutional authority to declare war and the president’s constitutional role as commander-in-chief. Stretching back to the Vietnam war, lawmakers have accused administrations of both parties of pursuing foreign wars and engaging in military conduct without congressional approval.“These airstrikes have NOT been authorized by Congress,” tweeted Val Hoyle, an Oregon Democrat. “The constitution is clear: Congress has the sole authority to authorize military involvement in overseas conflicts. Every president must first come to Congress and ask for military authorization, regardless of party.”Some critics resurfaced a 2020 tweet from Biden, in which the then presidential candidate declared: “Donald Trump does not have the authority to take us into war with Iran without congressional approval. A president should never take this nation to war without the informed consent of the American people.”The political fallout from the strikes in Yemen comes nearly a month after several Democrats were sharply critical of the administration’s decision to bypass Congress and approve the sale of tank shells to Israel amid a fraught debate within the party over Biden’s support for the war in Gaza.Barbara Lee, a California Democrat and longtime advocate of curtailing the president’s war-making authority, said Thursday’s strikes highlight the urgent need for Biden to seek an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.“This is why I called for a ceasefire early. This is why I voted against war in Iraq,” she wrote. “Violence only begets more violence. We need a ceasefire now to prevent deadly, costly, catastrophic escalation of violence in the region.” More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Antony Blinken warns Houthis of ‘consequences’ for attacks on Red Sea ships – video

      by

      The US secretary of state, has warned the Houthis that there would be ‘consequences’ for the Yemeni rebel group’s apparent attack on western warships in the Red Sea. Speaking to reporters in Bahrain during his tour of the Middle East, Antony Blinken said: ‘All I can tell you is that as we’ve made clear, and many other countries make clear, there will be consequences for the Houthis’ actions.’

      Blinken also called on Iran to cease its support for Houthis, as the group continued its blockade of Israel-linked and Israel-bound ships passing through the Red Sea More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Bernie Sanders demands answers on Israel’s ‘indiscriminate’ Gaza bombing

      by

      The US’s support for Israel’s bombing campaign in Gaza is facing new scrutiny in Washington following a proposed resolution by the independent senator Bernie Sanders that could ultimately be used to curtail military assistance.It is far from clear whether Sanders has the support to pass the resolution, but its introduction in the Senate this week – by an important progressive ally of the US president, Joe Biden – highlights mounting human rights and political concerns by Democrats on Capitol Hill.Citing the killing of nearly 19,000 people and wounding of more than 50,000 in Gaza since Hamas’s brutal 7 October attack, Sanders said it was time to force a debate on the bombing that has been carried out by the rightwing government of the Israel prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and the US government’s “complicity” in the war.“This is a humanitarian cataclysm, and it is being done with American bombs and money. We need to face up to that fact – and then we need to end our complicity in those actions,” Sanders said in a statement.If passed, the resolution would force the US state department to report back to Congress any violations of internationally recognized human rights caused by “indiscriminate or disproportionate” military operations in Gaza, as well as “the blanket denial of basic humanitarian needs”.The state department would also have to report back on any actions the US has taken to limit civilian risk caused by Israeli actions, a summary of arms provided to Israel since 7 October, an assessment of Israel’s compliance with international humanitarian law in Gaza, and a certification that Israeli security forces have not committed any human rights violations.“We all know Hamas’s brutal terrorist attack began this war,” Sanders said. “But the Netanyahu government’s indiscriminate bombing is immoral, it is in violation of international law, and the Congress must demand answers about the conduct of this campaign. A just cause for war does not excuse atrocities in the conduct of that war.”Any such resolution would have to clear the Senate but only require a simple majority. It would also have to pass the House and be signed by the White House.The resolution includes details about the extensive use of US arms, including massive explosive ordinance, such as Mark 84 2,000lb bombs and 155mm artillery, and includes “credible findings” by human rights monitors and press organizations about the use of US arms in specific strikes that killed a large number of civilians.If the resolution were to pass, the administration would have 30 days to produce the requested report. After it is received, Congress would under US law be able to condition, restrict, terminate or continue security assistance to Israel.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionCongress has not requested such a resolution since 1976.Sanders has come under pressure from progressive Democrats to support calls for a ceasefire. Instead, the senator has previously called for a “humanitarian pause” to allow more aid into Gaza.In a letter to Biden this week, Sanders called on the US president to withdraw his support for a $10.1bn weapons package for Israel, which is contained in a proposed supplemental foreign aid package, and for the US to support a UN resolution it has previous vetoed demanding an immediate humanitarian ceasefire. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      US imposes visa bans on Israeli settlers responsible for West Bank violence

      by

      In a rare punitive move against Israel, the US has announced it will impose travel bans on extremist Jewish settlers implicated in recent attacks on Palestinians in theWest Bank.The secretary of state, Antony Blinken, announced the decision on Tuesday after warning Israel last week that Joe Biden’s administration would be taking action over the attacks. Blinken did not announce individual visa bans, but officials said those would be coming this week and could affect dozens of settlers and their families.“We have underscored to the Israeli government the need to do more to hold accountable extremist settlers who have committed violent attacks against Palestinians in the West Bank,” Blinken said in a statement. “As President Biden has repeatedly said, those attacks are unacceptable.”“Today, the state department is implementing a new visa restriction policy targeting individuals believed to have been involved in undermining peace, security or stability in the West Bank, including through committing acts of violence or taking other actions that unduly restrict civilians’ access to essential services and basic necessities,” Blinken said.He said the US would continue to seek accountability for settler violence against Palestinians as well as Palestinian attacks against Israelis in the West Bank and Israel, particularly as tensions are extremely high due to the conflict in Gaza.“Both Israel and the Palestinian Authority have the responsibility to uphold stability in the West Bank,” Blinken said. “Instability in the West Bank both harms the Israeli and Palestinian people and threatens Israel’s national security interests.”Some analysts described it as a positive step. Martin Indyk, a former US ambassador to Israel, tweeted: “Finally, settler vigilantes will pay a price for their violent efforts to uproot West Bank Palestinians. I hope their Israeli government sponsors will not be allowed to fly either.”But Aaron David Miller, a former state department analyst, negotiator and adviser on Middle East issues, expressed doubt that the decision would fundamentally alter the situation. “It’s necessary but not sufficient,” he said. “It’s a welcome demonstration the administration takes seriously the reality of settler vigilantism. But as a practical matter it’s not going to change many hearts or minds.”Miller added: “I wouldn’t call it virtue signalling but in some respects it’s similar to the administration’s ban in the wake of [journalist Jamal] Khashoggi’s murder by the Saudi regime. There were visa restrictions imposed on a number of Saudis as well.”Tuesday’s move comes just a month after Israel was granted entry into the US visa waiver programme, which allows its citizens visa-free entry into the US. Those targeted will not be eligible for the programme, and those who hold current US visas will have them revoked.The Biden administration has firmly backed Israel since the Hamas attack on 7 October, even as international criticism of its military operation has mounted. But in recent weeks, the White House has stepped up calls on Israel to do more to limit civilian casualties as it expands its offensive and targets densely populated southern Gaza.Joe Biden and other senior US officials have warned repeatedly that Israel must act to stop increasing violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians in the West Bank. During meetings in Israel last week, Blinken told officials that the US was “ready to take action using our own authorities”.The first bans under the new policy would be imposed on Tuesday and more designations will be made in the coming days, a state department spokesperson, Matthew Miller, told reporters, adding it would ultimately affect dozens of people.Any Israeli with an existing US visa who was targeted would be notified that their visa was revoked, Miller added.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSince a 1967 Middle East war, Israel has occupied the West Bank, which Palestinians want as the core of an independent state. It has built Jewish settlements there that most countries deem illegal. Israel disputes this and cites historical and biblical ties to the land.Daily settler attacks have more than doubled, UN figures show, since Hamas, which controls the separate Palestinian territory of Gaza, killed 1,200 Israelis and took about 240 hostage. Israel has since bombed and invaded Gaza, killing more than 16,000 people.James Zogby, the founder and president of the Arab American Institute in Washington, was sceptical of the Biden administration’s response, which he described as “cosmetic and not indicative of a serious effort to stem settler violence”.He said: “If we know who the people are then we ought to be pressing that they be prosecuted for the crimes they’ve committed. But no such effort is underway. A significant number of the settlers in the settler movement are American citizens. What is being done to deal with that issue? There’s been no answer on that at all.”On Tuesday, in a sign of the mounting pressure, the Israeli defence minister, Yoav Gallant, condemned the violence by Jewish settlers in the West Bank, saying in a state of law only the police and the military had the right to use force. “There is, sadly, violence from extremists that we must condemn,” Gallant told a press conference.“In a state of law – and Israel is a state of law – the right to use violence belongs only to those who are certified to do so by the government, in our case that’s the IDF [military], the Israeli police, the Shin Bet [security service] and such,” Gallant said.“Nobody else has any authority to use violence,” he said. More

    • 238 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      A lasting peace in Gaza is now within reach – here’s how it can be achieved | Roee Kibrik

      by

      With a deal on the release of hostages and a pause in the fighting, the war in Gaza is entering a new stage. This four-day truce will see the handing over of dozens of hostages, but the pause also gives the international community an opportunity to promote stable and sustainable peace in Israel and the Palestinian territories. We are at a crossroads – and before us lies either a continuation of the conflict, or the impetus to find a permanent resolution.Hamas’s murderous attack on 7 October shattered many longstanding convictions. It brought the Palestinian issue back to centre stage; challenged the notion that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could be managed at a low cost; and undermined the belief that Israel could pursue integration in the Middle East while ignoring Palestinian demands. In its place, there is now a commonly held view across Israeli society that “managing the conflict” hasn’t worked, and that there instead must be a permanent resolution.At the same time, there are reasons why management of the conflict, rather than a protracted attempt at a resolution, would suit some of the main players. The US and UK governments both face elections in 2024, and are preoccupied with the war in Ukraine due to the need for stability and lower energy prices. Meanwhile, Arab leaderships are dealing with a range of internal challenges, and relative calm in the Palestinian arena may be enough to appease them. Hamas would be happy to continue to struggle with Israel without facing a diplomatic process that could provide legitimacy to the Palestinian Authority, strengthen moderate politicians and ultimately undermine its power.Netanyahu would also be content with managing the conflict, as any attempt to solve it would threaten the stability of his coalition and the continuation of his rule. His coalition, and consequently his leadership, relies on the support of the extremist settler movement. This faction adamantly opposes any compromises with the Palestinians and viewed Hamas as an “asset”, because its existence hinders the possibility of a peace process.It is therefore easy to imagine both sides sliding back into managing a low-intensity conflict. Under this scenario, the IDF would remain in Gaza for an extended period, continuing the fight against Hamas. The conflict would be confined to the Gaza Strip. The public would adjust to it. It would no longer be news, and the world would move its attention elsewhere – until the next eruption occurs in Gaza, the West Bank or in Lebanon.Alternatively, absent the will or the ability of the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority to bring about meaningful change, the international community, led by the US, could push toward a resolution of the conflict. To achieve that, the international community needs to promote several key steps.First and foremost, it must define the ultimate goal – which should be to commit to the implementation of the two-state solution and an embrace of the Arab Peace Initiative – and a timeline within which to achieve it. This can be done by via a resolution of the UN security council (UNSC). To overcome the tension between the US and Russia, it may require a representative of the Arab world such as the UAE to champion the proposal in the UNSC. If this path is blocked, a regional peace summit convened by the US would be a satisfactory alternative.Secondly, and of utmost importance, it is vital that Joe Biden leads the recognition of a Palestinian state by the US and other major countries, as part of a comprehensive diplomatic process. Such a step will ensure that there is no turning back. It will change the dynamic in Gaza and in the West Bank, making it difficult for Israel to continue its creeping annexation, and strengthen the Palestinian Authority against Hamas. Furthermore, such a move could boost Biden electorally, helping him to potentially regain support that he lost when backing Israel’s operation in Gaza.Knowing that the creation of a Palestinian state is the endgame will enable the third critical step to be taken by the international community: the formulation of an interim international-Palestinian regime. With a clear and recognised goal of achieving the two-state solution, an international force drawn from Arab and western countries could then be recruited to gradually replace the IDF in Gaza and take responsibility for security and development efforts. If the path to a two-state solution is defined, European and Arab countries will agree to invest in building the physical and institutional infrastructure of what Biden called a “revitalised Palestinian Authority”, leading the way to a Palestinian state. No one wants to continue pouring money into Gaza if the strategy of managing the conflict continues and its infrastructure needs to be rebuilt every few years after another round of war.The absence of worthy leadership in Israel and the Palestinian territories means that securing peace falls on the shoulders of Biden and the international community. He must step up and deliver.
      Roee Kibrik is director of research at Mitvim – the Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies, and a lecturer at Yezreel Valley College
      Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      UN security council backs resolution calling for humanitarian pause in Gaza

      by

      Six weeks after the start of the war in Gaza, the UN security council has come together to back a resolution calling for “urgent extended humanitarian pauses for [a] sufficient number of days to allow aid access” to the embattled territory.The vote late on Wednesday overcame an impasse which saw four unsuccessful attempts to adopt a resolution.Malta drafted the resolution, which calls for humanitarian corridors across the Gaza Strip and urges the release of all hostages held by Hamas.The US and the UK, two potentially veto-wielding powers, abstained on the resolution on the grounds that although they supported the emphasis on humanitarian relief, they could not give their full support because it contained no explicit criticism of Hamas. Russia also abstained on the grounds that it made no mention of an immediate ceasefire, its top imperative.The resolution was passed with 12 votes in favour, and is the first UN resolution on the Israel-Palestine conflict since 2016.The Israeli foreign ministry said it rejected the resolution, prompting the Palestinian representative, Riyad Mansour, to ask the UN security council members what they intended to do in the face of that defiance.The US had last month blocked a similar if broader resolution, but appears to have been persuaded to shift to abstention by Arab states in the face of the scale of the civilian deaths and destruction in Gaza.UN resolutions are in theory legally binding, but are widely ignored, and the political significance lies in the US willingness to back a call for an extended humanitarian ceasefire, putting some pressure on its close ally Israel. The American decision may reflect its frustration with Israel’s campaign, including the attack on al-Shifa hospital, the largest medical facility in Gaza.Human Rights Watch claimed: “That the US finally stopped paralysing the security council on Israel and Palestine so this resolution on the plight of children in Gaza could move forward should be a wake-up call to Israeli authorities that global concern even amongst allies is strong.”The passage of the resolution is a relief for the UN since the security council’s collective failure to reach a consensus since 7 October has been a severe blow to multilateralism and diplomacy.The resolution calls for the UN secretary general, António Guterres, to monitor any ceasefire that is implemented.The final draft watered down language from a “demand” to a “call” for humanitarian pauses, prompting Russia to claim the mountain has laboured and brought forward a mouse. Russia said it feared the absence of an explicit call for a ceasefire will make it less likely that even humanitarian pauses will be implemented.The resolution also made a call, as opposed to a demand, for “the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages held by Hamas and other groups”. The draft asks that “all parties comply with their obligations under international law, notably with regard to the protection of civilians, especially children”.In the four previous tries for security council approval, a Brazil-drafted resolution was vetoed by the United States, a US-drafted resolution was vetoed by Russia and China, and two Russian-drafted resolutions failed to get the minimum “yes” votes.The US envoy, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, justified its refusal to back the latest resolution saying: “There’s no excuse for failing to condemn these acts of terror. Let’s be crystal clear … Hamas set this conflict in motion.”The UK envoy to the UN, Dame Barbara Woodward, said: “It is impossible to comprehend the pain and the loss Palestinians civilians are enduring. Too many civilians including children are losing their lives.”She called for “a collective effort to get aid in as quickly as possible through as many routes as possible including food, water, medical supplies and fuel”. More