On American-Israeli differences

In official statements, the US administration blames Israel for its use of stupid bombs, that is, bombs that are not precisely guided, and indiscriminate bombing that targets civilians indiscriminately. 

These statements made by President Joe Biden and conveyed by National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, and whose details are scheduled to be discussed by Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, come a full ten weeks late, and they certainly will not do justice to the victims, who number more than twenty-five thousand (if we take into account the official figures and a large percentage of those trapped under the rubble), and it will not change the Israeli methods of war in any way, as it comes in the form of advice and observations and not in decisive and strict language, because whoever finances the war with many billions of dollars, opens an air bridge to transport all types of weapons, equipment, ammunition and equipment, and moves plane carriers are to deter any regional party thinking of intervening in the interest of the Palestinians, and to protect Israel from any binding international resolution that can stop the brutal war with a signal or a call.

The United States expressed its opposition to Israel reoccupying the Gaza Strip, or cutting off part of its area and displacing Palestinians to Sinai or elsewhere, with mounting calls for the return of settlement and control of the marine gas fields off the coast of Gaza. There are those who insist on reviving the idea of the “Ben Gurion Canal” between the Gulf of Aqaba and the Mediterranean Sea as an alternative channel to the Suez Canal, and believe that getting rid of the Gaza Strip and its residents will reduce the costs of constructing that canal. These calls have reached the point of demanding the erasure of the Gaza Strip and turning it into an Israeli national park. As for the least extreme of them, they demand the establishment of a security strip with a width ranging between 2-3 kilometers, which means cutting off about a third of the area of the Strip, so that any agricultural or urban activities are prohibited.

The American verbal statements were accompanied by positions in support of Israel without reservation, such as in the votes in the Security Council and the United Nations General Assembly, and the adoption of war goals, and even in issuing some statements and conditions that the Israelis themselves did not say, such as “this war will not end except with the surrender of Hamas.” And "Sinwar's days are numbered"! For all of this, the apparent American-Israeli differences can be understood as merely minor, minor differences, no more than those existing between the poles of the Israeli war council.

So the apparent change in the American tone, does not represent a late awakening, nor a fundamental change in the positions supporting the war, despite the presence of factors that require a change in that, especially the decline in the popularity of President Biden, and the protest of broad circles in the ranks of the Democratic Party, especially from the younger generation. 

Influential circles dissociated from this party, including the Arab, Muslim and African-American communities, and threatened not to vote for Biden, but the latter and his administration chose to appease these circles with sweet words and claims of neutrality in exchange for absolute support for Israel and the war of extermination with all its war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The United States is fighting this war as if it were its own war, and not because it concerns a friendly or allied country. The relationship between the United States and Israel is described as an organic relationship that differs from any distinct relations between two countries. Israel has been and continues to play the functional roles assigned to it in serving American strategic interests on both levels regional and global. Among these roles is confronting any regime that derives an independent national policy for itself that conflicts with American policies. And against liberation movements, and supporting corrupt and tyrannical regimes around the world that the US Congress places restrictions on dealing with. Israel is also considered the largest applied laboratory for testing types of American weapons, as the military, security and technological industries represent an extension of the arms industry complexes in the United States.
Some analysts describe Israel as the largest aircraft carrier in the world in terms of its low cost compared to the great benefits it provides to the United States. Therefore, it was not strange for the American president, who described himself as a Zionist, to say, “If Israel did not exist, we would work to create it.” As for the talk that is repeated like a record, Old statements about “common democratic values” and the Jewish state are nothing but blatant lies, and perhaps the main thing they have in common is the willingness to commit genocide, wage wars, and fabricate slander to justify them.

Perhaps what explains these apparent contradictions and differences is what was stated by US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, who said that Israel may achieve tactical victories but will suffer a strategic loss, and this applies to many historical events and wars in which great powers superior in weapons and capabilities faced local powers. It is lower in capabilities but stronger morally, as happened in the confrontations between the United States and Vietnam and Afghanistan, and between France and Vietnam and then Algeria, where there is no room for comparison between the military capabilities of the United States and its opponents. In the war on Gaza, there is a gross imbalance in the balance of power between the Israeli military arsenal armed with the latest aircraft, tanks and battleships, and based on a strong economy and unlimited support from the most powerful country in the world, and a resistance that developed in a besieged and suffocated environment and deprived of the most basic capabilities, but strengthened by faith in its cause. Its people adhere to freedom, and thus the equation becomes an expression of the human will in the face of the tyranny of the machine, and it is based on a historical equation in our Arab-Islamic heritage that states the possibility of the victory of blood over the sword, and the palm over the awl. Thus, Israel's continuation of its war and the crimes of genocide it commits contribute to its isolation and affect its status, image, and ambitions to integrate into the region, continue breaking isolation, and establish normalized relations with Arab and Islamic countries.

For all of the above, the American administration seems to be more concerned than Israel and its leaders, who see no further than their own noses and public opinion polls, and are chasing imaginary victories over a people who have nothing to lose except the restrictions of occupation, siege, and policies of humiliation.