Israeli Newspaper: It is time for Israel to start listening as it speaks

By Dan Kurtzer

To those looking from the outside, the political differences between the United States and Israel appear to be confusing, even contradictory: the Biden administration has expressed unprecedented support for Israel - constant arms supplies, continuing political support - even amid growing opposition to this support within the Democratic party, and in Arab-American universities and communities. At the same time, there is an escalation in the Israeli response to American demands to reduce the scale of the attack on Gaza and allow the entry of humanitarian aid. In a problematic statement, it was said that “we are not a banana republic”; After the United States refrained from using its veto, Israel refused to send its delegation to Washington to hold dialogues regarding Rafah, even though Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu assured Biden that he would send the delegation.

The explanation for the decision to prevent sending the delegation was not logical: Netanyahu considered the United States’ decision a “retreat” from the positions of the previous administration. First, it is unacceptable, and also shameful, for a foreign leader to describe American policy in this way. The United States formulates its policies itself, after taking into account the opinions of friends and allies. Its continued support for Israel in the United Nations Security Council is enough to prompt the prime minister to stop and review his calculations, before directing such criticism regarding the American abstention.

Second, the Security Council resolution included enough conditions that the United States had guaranteed and presented itself last week (and Russia and China vetoed it), in order to convince the administration to allow the resolution to pass. In particular, the resolution demands a ceasefire during the month of Ramadan - which means it is limited - and demands the liberation of the hostages without any conditions. Therefore, it is very difficult to explain the severity of the Israeli response. There is no logic in postponing the Israeli delegation's travel to Washington.

Despite this, the administration made clear decisively its opposition to a large-scale Israeli attack on Rafah, without a plan that addresses the security of the one million Palestinians “accumulated” there. The administration also made clear that it does not oppose, in principle, an offensive step against Hamas in Rafah, provided that this plan takes civilians into account. This was the explanation for the request to send a delegation. So, why does Netanyahu not want to dialogue with the Americans at this crucial moment?

Also, launching a full Israeli attack on Rafah, without consulting Washington, is contrary to logic. First, the timing is very problematic. The administration is examining whether Israel adheres to the National Security Memorandum (Memorandum-20), which forces countries that use American weapons to use them only in accordance with international law, and that it will not oppose the United States distributing humanitarian aid. If Israel does not take these steps, the president will consider additional steps, such as freezing future arms shipments. After Vice President Camilla Harris warned of possible attacks on Rafah, it is best for Israel not to try to test the limits of US patience in this regard, and at this time. Second, although Israel claims to have achieved certain achievements in the war against Hamas, the price – tens of thousands of dead Palestinian civilians and a humanitarian crisis in Gaza – is too high.

Also, these achievements were damaged with the return of Hamas fighters to the northern Gaza Strip, through tunnels, and the inability to prevent them and their leaders from doing so. Launching a major attack on Rafah would indeed capture more Hamas fighters, but the question is: at what cost and for what purpose, if the central leadership of Hamas is still alive and effective?

It's time for Israel to start listening as much as it speaks. A careful examination of the administration’s demands would convince the United States that it is a partner in the goals of causing severe harm to Hamas, so that it cannot return and take control of Gaza again, threaten Israel again, achieve the release of the hostages without condition, or with conditions that Israel accepts, and guarantee Humanitarian aid to Palestinian civilians without any delay, and to restore security to Gaza and the surrounding towns that were destroyed during the Hamas attack on October 7, in a way that allows the population to return to their homes and rebuild, and to renew diplomatic talks and seriously address the basic issues in this conflict, which includes Israeli occupation for 57 years, and ongoing Palestinian “terrorism”.

A historical reminder: Dean Rusk, US Secretary of State in the administrations of John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, once said that the most important tool in diplomacy is the ability and willingness to listen. This is good advice for the current government of Israel.