U.S.-Israel Tensions: The Biden Administration's Struggle to Influence Netanyahu Amid Rising Middle East Conflict
A Powerless U.S. in the Middle East?
During the past few weeks, the United States had appeared helpless in the face of gale-force winds spreading violence throughout the Middle East as Netanyahu continued military operations even after direct appeals from President Joe Biden to rein in tensions. Netanyahu's stubborn refusal to back down to the perceived U.S. insistence on an end to its acts of aggression in Lebanon has brought severe question marks to the already- apparent dwindling influence of America in this region, as the White House was left incapable of directing the course of events or bringing the conflict from metastasizing any further.
At the heart of the newest crisis stands the Israeli assassination of Hezbollah's longtime leader, Hassan Nasrallah. The airstrike, which killed him and several other top Hezbollah leaders in the southern Beirut suburb, marked yet another moment when Netanyahu acted unilaterally, pushing aside U.S. diplomacy to be his own man in the region for most. And despite the Israeli government claiming that killing Nasrallah was an act of self-defense, it really had its work cut out for it as it seemed completely blindsided by this attack's timing and implications.
Netanyahu's Defiance and the White House's Frustration
These recent Israeli airstrikes that launched southern Lebanon on a Friday have been quite the rude awakening for the Biden administration. Various leaders, incumbent and former, in the United States have blown off steam over how Netanyahu is perceived to have ignored American sensitivities and gone ahead with moves that could make the region even more unstable. The White House had been making diplomatic overtures as part of efforts to secure a deadline for a ceasefire from Israel and Hezbollah, and it had shuttled between delegations at the United Nations General Assembly in New York, where it had attempted to hammer out a 21-day ceasefire agreement. The administration was so confident about the success of these efforts that a senior official had briefed reporters about its anticipation of an eventual accord by both sides.
But despite the diplomatic moves, the Israeli airstrike surprised American officials who thought they were at the last stage before reaching an agreement. Even as TV images showed gigantic smoke plumes pouring above southern Beirut, it was clear Netanyahu had opted to take his own course of action, one that went against the grain of what Washington wanted - namely to calm things down. According to the US sources, Senior Pentagon leaders, other top officials across the administration, President Joe Biden, and others, were consumed by anger at the timing of the Israeli operation.
The Dread of a Larger Regional War
The frustration of the Biden administration with Netanyahu's moves is not only in the form of diplomatic snubs but rather a genuine concern that Israel's aggressive approach may turn the escalating regional conflict into full-scale war. Since the airstrike that killed Nasrallah, Israeli airstrikes continue hitting Lebanon, with Lebanese health officials revealing that more than 1,000 people had been killed in just two weeks. U.S. officials warn that attacks of this sort could be the start of something much more sinister, potentially drawing in neighboring countries like Iran and then worse still pull the United States to a part of a larger, more dangerous war in the Middle East.
The White House issued a statement following the strike that killed Nasrallah, saying his death brought "a measure of justice for his many victims, including thousands of Americans, Israelis, and Lebanese civilians." Yet the statement also made clear that the U.S. favors de-escalation. The White House called for diplomatic solutions to the continued conflicts both in Gaza and Lebanon and at the same time emphasized that it was time for all parties to accept the proposed ceasefire deals.
However, even as this administration has sought ways to lower the temperature in the region, its efforts have so far failed. Faced with yet another failed U.S.-led initiative, Secretary Blinken asked Israel for the umpteenth time to choose diplomacy over militancy as that alternative will bring "greater instability and insecurity" and ripple down across the world. "The decisions that all parties make in the coming days will determine which way this region is headed, with profound consequences for its people now and potentially for years to come," Blinken said in a statement after the strike.
Netanyahu's Independent Course: A Year of Defiance
The recent assassination of Hassan Nasrallah is only the latest example in a series of decisions Netanyahu and his far-right ruling coalition have made to pursue an independent course in the Middle East, largely ignoring U.S. concerns and criticisms. For more than a year now, since militants from Hamas staged a surprise attack on Israel in Gaza, Netanyahu's government has refused to accept international criticism over its military tactics and casualties of civilians in Gaza.
According to Palestinian health officials, more than 41,000 have died in Gaza since Israel launched its offensive last year-more than anywhere since the Rwandan genocide-and yet Netanyahu remains unmoved by the global outcry this is provoking among humanitarian organizations and the international community. Throughout most of this time period, President Biden has strongly embraced Israel, assuming that without qualification from the United States, Netanyahu would come to rely on America and thus be more accommodating to U.S. demands. Over the last year, however, it has become painfully obvious that his ability to shape Netanyahu's decisions is eroding.
Diminished U.S. Leverage
As civilian casualties continue to mount in Gaza, US officials have repeatedly gone public and private with appeals to Israel to change its military tactics and make concessions that would culminate in a ceasefire. So far, those entreaties have largely fallen on deaf ears. Even veiled threats from the Biden administration that it might curtail or suspend arms supplies to Israel have had little bearing on Netanyahu's decision-making. Israel, which has large weapons reserves in place, does not appear to be perturbed by the prospect of reduced U.S. military help.
On the issue of President Biden, he would not be willing to take extreme measures that allow cutting off all U.S. military aid to Israel. There are many fellow Democratic Members in Congress calling him out to do this, but Biden has not obliged. Military supply is still going out from the U.S., like 2,000 pound bombs and Hellfire missiles, as a testament that their administration commits itself to ensuring the safety of Israel. But, according to analysts, even if the U.S. would stop supply, it is still unlikely to make a drastic change in Israel's strategy since it has already stocked weapons, and for its part, is bent in following its course independently.
The reasons for Biden's failure to change Netanyahu's policy are multifaceted. However, according to Western officials and analysts, from Israel's divergent strategic aims to the internal pressures facing Netanyahu within his right-wing ruling coalition, Netanyahu cannot afford to alienate these voices, who have pushed for a hardline stance on security issues-including military actions against Hezbollah and Hamas.
For Netanyahu and his boosters, a constituency that includes many of the Republican critics of Biden, the White House is mistaken in worrying about increasing violence in the region. For them, the surest way to prevent an all-out war across the region is not to negotiate but to retaliate hard against Israel's enemies, including Iran and its surrogates, Hezbollah among them. They claim that, through the raising of any cost on the potential attack against Israel, it can prevent the enemy from attacking and compel it to change its mind about the benefits of continued aggression.
A senior Israeli official expressed hope that the operation against Nasrallah would eliminate the need for a ground invasion of Lebanon. The official also hinted that Israel aimed to seize the moment of direct breakthrough it had gained from the attack to deliver another military move. He also emphasized that support for Israel is not defense for the United States, but rather as the country under direct rocket attacks from Iran and its proxies.
Biden's Diplomatic Dilemmas: Arab Friends and Regional Complexities
The Biden administration is facing a litany of challenges-a developing affair with the sectarian regimes, and the newly hostile attitude of Arab allies. It has also failed to rally its Arab allies and partners in the region, many of whom have been unwilling to give full-throated support to efforts by the U.S. to diminish the influence of Hamas or Hezbollah. For most of the Arab governments, maintaining too harsh an attitude against these groups endangers triggering internal unrest, as large sections of their populations sympathize with the Palestinian cause and consider Israeli action in Gaza and Lebanon persecution.
As Aaron David Miller, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, noted, many Arab leaders are extremely careful not to get too close to the U.S. in its effort to counter Hamas and Hezbollah. "Their publics are horrified by the destruction the Israelis have caused. They can't get too close," Miller said. He added that these governments are unlikely to become "the tip of the American spear against Hamas or Iran."
#Conclusion: The Way Ahead
The wars being fought today in the Middle East-between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Israel and Iran-is what Miller refers to as "an ongoing war of attrition." There is no easy victory down the road, no apparent diplomatic plank out on the horizon that might somehow more clearly define a peaceful answer to the root issues in these and other current conflicts. Rather, the most realistic choices that are available to the U.S. and its allies involve strategies to contain or deter potential anti-American and pro-friend rival powers while taking incremental moves that address near-term issues without having to solve the deeper problems at stake.
Ultimately, the leaders who will determine the dynamics of the future of the region are not in Washington. "The person who is key to an understanding of all this is Netanyahu," Miller notes, adding that the leaders of Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah's successor also will be crucial in determining the emerging dynamics of the future of the region. The challenge facing the Biden administration will be how to navigate such intricate dynamics when it realizes its influence may be limited but that inaction or miscalculation in this volatile region can be extremely deadly.