Resource Author: the Center for International Policy

The Gaza War at One Year: Five Recommendations for Ending the Fighting and Ensuring Human Security in the Middle East

This week marks one year since the horrific Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack and atrocities against civilians in southern Israel, followed by the devastating and often indiscriminate Israeli assault on Gaza. Of the more than 40,000 Palestinians currently estimated to have been killed in Gaza during the war, at least 6,000 are women and 11,000 are children, with nearly 2 million civilians subjected to displacement, disease and desperate hunger. In addition to the more than 1,150 Israelis killed in Hamas’ initial attack, the Israeli government believes that 97 of the 251 hostages abducted by Hamas on October 7 remain in Gaza, including the bodies of at least 33 confirmed dead.

This memo updates our recommended steps for the Biden Administration to take to stop the fighting, end the nightmare faced by Palestinian civilians and Israeli hostages, arrest the spread of large-scale war in Lebanon and possibly with Iran, and ensure the long term security, rights and well-being of Israelis, Palestinians and all people in the region.

Recommendation #1: Finally use U.S. leverage to press for a full ceasefire

A full and sustained ceasefire and hostage release in Gaza is vitally necessary to prevent further loss of civilian life and suffering on a mass scale given continuing bombardment, disease and hunger across the territory, and the nightmare being experienced by Israeli hostages’ families. Prolonged fighting in Gaza and inability to achieve a ceasefire has also directly contributed to escalation in the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon and between the U.S. and Houthis in Yemen – as well as with the Iranian regime which has responded to acts of Israeli escalation in the region with escalating attacks of its own.

The Biden administration’s diplomacy to secure a ceasefire has unfortunately been hobbled by the continued unconditional supply of offensive weapons to Israel even as Netanyahu (according to his own negotiators) obstructed ceasefire efforts for months. The U.S. has rightly applied heavy sanctions and other forms of pressure against Hamas since October 7 and for decades prior – its unused leverage in ceasefire diplomacy is unquestionably vis-a-vis Israel. President Biden needs to end months of toothless rhetoric and finally apply meaningful pressure to Netanyahu by suspending U.S. arms deliveries.

Recommendation #2: Fully enforce U.S. law and arms policy to ensure accountability and adequate humanitarian aid delivery

Pressured by Democratic lawmakers’ efforts to legislate against Israel’s misuse of U.S. arms and its impeding of humanitarian aid delivery in Gaza, President Biden on February 8, 2024 issued National Security Memorandum 20 (NSM-20), requiring Israel and other recipients of U.S. military assistance to affirm that they would use American-origin arms in accordance with international humanitarian law and were complying with longstanding U.S. law, Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA), prohibiting countries from restricting the delivery of U.S. humanitarian aid. Contrary to the assessments of numerous international aid agencies and many of the interested lawmakers, on March 25, the administration indicated that it accepted Israel’s initial assurance that it is and would remain in compliance with these requirements as “credible and reliable.” 

Treating the assurances received from the Israeli government as credible and reliable in the face of aid delivery obstruction, disproportionate civilian casualties and other well-documented violations of international humanitarian law has undercut NSM-20 and damaged the administration’s credibility while functionally greenlighting the continued use of American weapons in ways that clearly violate U.S. laws, interests and values. Failure to take action under NSM-20 or Section 620I of the FAA also compounded the longstanding failure to adequately enforce the Leahy Law, which prohibits U.S. assistance to foreign security units engaged in a consistent pattern of gross violations of human rights. The administration should immediately correct course and fully enforce U.S. law by suspending delivery to Israel of the arms it is using in Gaza, while pressing for and helping coordinate a massive emergency increase in humanitarian aid and services to the territory.

Recommendation #3: Focus diplomacy toward a just resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on multilateral rather than bilateral normalization efforts

There is broad consensus in Israel, Palestine and globally that returning to the status quo that existed before October 7 is impossible. While the Biden administration has rightly acknowledged this reality in rhetoric emphasizing the need for a resolution to the underlying Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it nonetheless reverted to prioritizing the Trump/Netanyahu vision of piecemeal bilateral normalization agreements between Israel and Arab- and Muslim-majority autocracies incentivized by massive U.S. advanced arms sales. Rather than increase stability and advance a just end to the conflict, these accords have given cover to the consolidation of Israeli control of the occupied Palestinian Territories and the inherently discriminatory denial of fundamental Palestinian national, political and human rights in violation of international law.

A meaningful and viable effort to resolve the underlying conflict requires prioritizing Palestinian self-determination and championing the inherent benefits of Israel’s full acceptance and integration in the Middle East, while moving away from an “arms for peace” model where recognition of Israel is bought with U.S. weapons and defense guarantees that tie the United States to autocrats and increase militarization and instability in the region. It also means avoiding the failed model of a peace process based on direct, bilateral negotiations between parties with a massive imbalance of military and diplomatic power.

Instead, the United States should seek to construct a truly multilateral framework involving key regional players with universal normalization and recognition of the national rights of both Israelis and Palestinians – alongside ensuring the security and well-being of both peoples – as its North Star. Different models, such as the Arab Peace Initiative or recent joint Israeli/Palestinian proposals from Holy Land Confederation and Land For All could be introduced as terms of reference. As the government of Saudi Arabia itself has recently emphasized, absent a focus on achieving universal recognition of Palestinian statehood, the lack of a political horizon will prevent normalization and continue to feed insecurity.

Recommendation #4: Take meaningful anti-occupation, anti-annexation steps

Permanent Israeli occupation and annexation of Palestinian territory are incompatible with international law and U.S. interests. Failure to impose consequences for Israel’s ongoing effort to consolidate permanent, undemocratic control in the territories dooms any conflict resolution effort and will continue to feed the current cycle of violence. The Biden administration has rightly begun to move away from the demonstrably inadequate practice of limiting itself to mild criticism of deepening occupation and related human rights abuses. Explicitly reinstating State Department legal guidance that settlements are inconsistent with international law and the issuance of an Executive Order to combat settler violence and other destabilizing activity in the West Bank are welcome, if overdue, first steps.

Yet the administration’s unwillingness to impose real consequences for official Israeli actions that violate international law in the West Bank – or even Israel’s killing of American citizens – and efforts to ease the impact of its own sanctions on the relatively small number of violent settlers penalized under its Executive Order again undermines the credibility it was just beginning to build in this area. The administration should instead press forward using its anti-occupation tools, including consistently applying its Executive Order to designate Israeli officials responsible for evictions, demolitions and forced relocations in West Bank Palestinian communities, while making clear that use of U.S. arms in connection with such settlement and annexation activity also violates NSM-20.

Recommendation #5: Substantially expand support for the Palestinian people and Palestinian leaders who seek peace with Israel

The Biden Administration should strengthen the legitimacy of Palestinians seeking a peaceful path to conflict resolution by upgrading the United States’ own bilateral relations with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), including by finally following through on its promise to reopen a consulate in Jerusalem serving Palestinians, exercising existing executive authority to terminate the decades-old legislative designation of the PLO as a terrorist organization, and working with regional and other international partners toward a major economic and infrastructure support program benefitting the Palestinian people.

This is especially necessary in the wake of the shameful statutory cut-off of all U.S. funding of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) for one year in a hasty, politically-driven response to the participation of a small number of its 13,000 Gaza-based staff in the October 7 attack. Not only should the Biden administration do its utmost to ensure that the international community is able to make up the shortfall to UNRWA caused by this shortsighted collective punishment of the top relief agency in Gaza and the millions of refugees it serves throughout the region, but it must work now to ensure that critical governance structures, funds and infrastructure are in place as soon as possible after the war to meet the substantial ongoing needs of Palestinian people in Gaza and elsewhere.

The Biden administration must also recognize and meaningfully act on the fact that paying mere lip service to Palestinian self-determination while blocking lawful, nonviolent initiatives toward Palestinian statehood only delays the day when such intensive international support is no longer needed. The United States must stop discouraging international organizations and other countries from recognizing Palestinian statehood, and must cease its delegitimization of international court proceedings involving Israel.

While a comprehensive, permanent resolution to their conflict can only be agreed between Israelis and Palestinians themselves, Palestinians are well within their rights as a nation to seek recognition of their state and enforcement of their rights from international organizations and governments around the world. Binding themselves to the obligations of statehood and acceding to treaties that require responsible conduct are non-violent, international law-affirming efforts that should be applauded, not discouraged or penalized. The United States should therefore cease its practice of delegitimizing these efforts, and instead welcome them as bolstering the prospects for a peaceful and just resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

CIP Logo Wordless Transparent

Statement on Major Israeli Escalation in Lebanon

Center for International Policy (CIP) executive vice president Matt Duss issued the following statement regarding Israel’s recent escalation in Lebanon, including the current ground offensive:

“The Israeli government’s decision to dramatically escalate its attacks in Lebanon is a dangerous gamble that risks the lives of countless Lebanese, Israeli, Palestinian and other civilians across the region.

“Israel has the right to defend itself from Hezbollah and other threats, but we note that this escalation comes after months of Prime Minister Netanyahu rejecting U.S. efforts to secure a ceasefire in Gaza. As we know from the very recent past, the potential for protracted, deadly escalation is significant. Israel has been caught in a costly quagmire in Lebanon before – one that ultimately did not defeat Hezbollah or provide lasting security on its northern border. An Israeli military assault on Lebanon that employs the same methods or maximalist objectives as the nearly year-old war in Gaza threatens to cause even more devastation and death, with civilians bearing the brunt of the carnage.

“The Biden Administration is right to seek deescalation, but must realize that months of failure to impose meaningful consequences on Netanyahu for grave international humanitarian law violations and obstructing a ceasefire in Gaza has contributed to the disregard for U.S. and international concerns with which Israel has now acted in Lebanon. The ability of the United States to prevent an all-out war that could draw in the U.S. and Iran and imperil millions in the region, including American personnel, rests on whether President Biden is finally willing to take the steps necessary – including suspending offensive weapons deliveries – to prevent a horrific conflagration.”

###

The US Must Do More To Ensure Justice and Accountability for Ayşenur Eygi

On September 6, American Ayşenur Ezgi Eygi was killed after Israeli troops fired on a demonstration in the Nablus region of the West Bank. The shooting death of the 26-year old U.S. citizen has prompted growing calls for the Biden Administration to conduct its own independent investigation, as Eygi’s family has urged. 

Common Dreams’ Jake Johnson reports: 

Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, said Monday that “the Biden Administration should be launching its own investigation into the killing of an American citizen.” “Instead,” he added, “it’s deflecting and deferring to Israel to hold its own soldiers and settlers accountable, which Israel has repeatedly failed to do.”

In a separate post on X, Williams added that the Biden Administration must act in accordance with U.S. laws and policies, calling on U.S. officials to  suspend security assistance to the units involved, conduct an investigation per the Civilian Harm Incident Response Guidance (CHIRG) and launch an FBI probe.

CIP Logo Wordless Transparent

Taiwan & Tensions with China: Five Recommendations for US Policy

Taiwan has built a vibrant democracy on values Americans share and is an important US economic partner. China is the largest power in the region and sees Taiwan’s fate as central to its own national interest. US leaders need to manage these realities in a way that enhances regional and global stability, rather than framing disagreements over Taiwan as part of a dangerous narrative of inevitable conflict with China. Rhetoric about “winning” wars that neither Americans nor the people in that region want to fight is misguided and reckless. The US can best serve Taiwan’s security, and our own, by stabilizing relations with China in a manner that reduces the dangerous tensions that have built up between Washington and Beijing. The Center for International Policy has developed the following recommendations for US action toward that goal.

Recommendation #1: Ratchet “competition” rhetoric down rather than up

The people and government of Taiwan—as well as nearly all countries in the region—are saying loud and clear that they want a reduction in US–China tensions. Most countries also do not want to be forced to align with one side against the other. 

The United States should amplify statements and actions that bolster the status quo. It should reiterate its longstanding position of strategic ambiguity to both China and Taiwan, and avoid inflammatory symbolic gestures that do little to increase Taiwan’s security but signal to China that Taiwan is moving toward formal independence. While opinion in Taiwan is highly fragmented on what status to ultimately aim for, there is an overwhelming consensus on what to do today: four of every five people in Taiwan want to maintain the ambiguous status quo.

When Chinese official actions warrant criticism, the United States must also take care to clearly distinguish between the Chinese Communist Party-controlled government and the Chinese people. Calling out the human rights violations, repressive policies and authoritarianism of the Chinese government is crucial, but so is countering the increasing vilification of China in American politics, which not only puts the Chinese diaspora and Asian-Americans at risk of increased discrimination and violence; it repeats the dangerous “clash of civilizations” narrative reminiscent of the disastrous “war on terror” era.

Recommendation #2: Support—don’t jeopardize—Taiwan’s self-defense

Meeting the United States’ long-held objective of preserving stability in East Asia and the Pacific requires avoiding and dissuading others from taking actions that increase risks of war, encourage militarist policies, or empower reactionary politicians. America’s key tasks in this regard are to foreclose on the prospect of a future crisis and make miscalculation less, rather than more, likely.

That means robustly supporting Taiwan’s self defense according to a principle of non-offensive or non-provocative defense, balancing the need to defend against and render prohibitively costly Chinese attempts at conquest with the twin imperatives of both preventing war in the first place and reducing the prospects of nuclear escalation should a war occur. Accordingly, US arms sales should focus on capabilities that support the political status quo and preserve strategic stability. That includes systems to help Taiwan blunt Chinese power projection while avoiding new weapons systems that could range deep into the Chinese mainland and eschewing an arms buildup on a scale that would be reasonably misperceived as mobilizing for war. It also means undertaking efforts to ensure Taiwanese cybersecurity and combat disinformation that could stoke belligerent sentiment and trigger confrontation.

Recommendation #3: Foster stability by ensuring the legitimacy of international law survive its tests in Ukraine and Gaza

While differences in the precise circumstances and histories of each conflict are apparent, Chinese aggression toward Taiwan would be subject to the same international humanitarian law (IHL) obligations as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the war in Gaza. The extent to which the United States affirms and acts to uphold the laws of war, human rights and democratic principles with regard to those conflicts has a tremendous impact on the international legal landscape in which China operates vis-a-vis Taiwan.

Failure to champion adherence to international law in these conflicts – either by backing away from material support for Ukraine as it fights illegal conquest or by continuing to largely ignore Israeli IHL violations both in Gaza and in connection with its deepening occupation and annexation of the West Bank – undermines the universality of their application and makes it easier for actors like China to ignore them without fear of consequences from other states. The US unwillingness to take meaningful steps to protect Palestinian lives and rights in the Gaza war has led to accusations of hypocrisy. Continuing that mistaken approach, alongside the movement by rightwing forces in the US to limit or cease support for Ukraine, will only further degrade the international order the US constructed after WWII, eroding an important barrier to China and other actors that may consider more aggressive actions of their own.

Recommendation #4: Invest in the US domestic critical technology workforce, while cooperating with China on shared challenges like climate change.

The Biden administration has already taken steps to increase domestic production capacity for technologies critical to the security and economy of the United States, especially advanced technologies and those essential to address dire challenges like climate change. US technical innovation led the way in the 20th century and should continue to do so as we face new global challenges. Increasing government support for programs to ensure an ample and sustainable workforce for these industries – including through transitional income support, student loan forgiveness and substantially increased across–the-board investments in public education and societal welfare – should therefore also be pursued as a US security priority. 

At the same time, US strategic investments in American democracy, equality, and prosperity must be undertaken in such a way that they do not simply redirect insecurity toward the rest of the world. The technologies needed to survive, mitigate, and overcome challenges like climate change and global health threats will not be built in one nation, and will require significant investment and cooperation from governments across the world.

Both China and the US face tremendous challenges from warming temperatures, particularly in the area of desertification and water security. Cynically exploiting these vulnerabilities in China, as some have argued the United States should, in the hope that they lead to crisis and instability is both immoral and dangerous. Catastrophic or even substantial dysfunction in one of the world’s largest countries, economic engines and a nuclear power would imperil US and global security in a multitude of areas. Instead, the United States should approach cooperation on addressing urgent climate change imperatives – such as working with China to leverage non debt-creating climate finance investments and provide critical technical assistance to developing countries – as an opportunity to build trust and identify areas of mutual benefit on other issues.

Recommendation #5: Advance global priorities that break away from an outdated and counterproductive “Great Power Competition” mindset

The explicit embrace of a “Great Power Competition” worldview by the Biden Administration and much of the US foreign policy establishment drives its fixation on reducing China’s presence and influence around the world. The dangerously unquestioned need to “counter” or even “beat” China in region after region across the globe is not only reactionary, but subordinates US interests at home and abroad to a zero-sum fight that drains US resources and goodwill. China’s leaders, in turn, seem happy to accept the prestige that comes with being the apparently destined competitor of the United States. They shape China’s foreign and military policy with this confrontation paradigm in mind, with Taiwan’s fate teetering at the leading edge.

The United States needs to recognize and secure its interests in the reality of a multi-polar world, rather than futilely attempting to forestall it via a costly and ultimately self-defeating effort to constantly disadvantage China. US military spending is already three times that of China (which is investing much of the difference in sectors like green technology). While China has a larger naval fleet in terms of vessel numbers, the US has far greater naval capability. What ultimately matters is not the actual balance of forces, but what a nation does with its share of the balance–and that has much to do with the overall tenor of relations and policy choices outside the military domain. The challenges that we face globally – among them climate change, political instability and pandemics — require equally global cooperation and cannot be solved militarily. 

To break out of the zero-sum competition that dominates strategic thinking on both sides, a new approach to defining success in global influence is required, focusing on 1) global public goods like universal public health infrastructure and green energy for all; 2) significantly increasing development investment in those countries and regions that have been starved of capital for decades; and 3) guaranteeing human, political and labor rights globally. Building international cooperation around such a transformation of the global economy would reestablish US–China relations  on a new foundation, revive the legitimacy of international norms by expanding the opportunity it offers to people of all countries, and address the truly existential threats humanity faces today.

CIP Analysis of New Congressional Ukraine and Israel Aid Proposals

We are hopeful that Congress will finally provide long overdue aid to help the people of Ukraine repel Russia’s illegal invasion. With Ukraine’s financial and critical military resources nearly exhausted, this US assistance is vital to preventing Vladimir Putin from achieving his goal of destroying Ukrainian independence and democracy.

In contrast to Ukraine’s demonstrated need for funds to counter conquest and occupation by an expansionist nuclear power, the effort to provide billions of dollars in new American taxpayer funding for weapons to Israel to use in its devastating campaign in Gaza is not militarily, financially or strategically justified.

While Israel has the right and responsibility to defend its people and take military action in response to Hamas’ horrific October 7, 2023 attack, Israel’s campaign in Gaza is failing to achieve its own stated objectives of rescuing the Israelis taken hostage or “eliminating” Hamas from the territory. Instead, Israel’s disproportionate bombardment and siege of the territory with US weapons has resulted in more than 30,000 deaths – two-thirds of which Israel itself estimates are civilians – nearly half of them children.

Despite calls by American lawmakers for meaningful conditions on US military assistance to prevent Israel’s continued use of US arms in a manner that President Biden himself has twice called “indiscriminate,” the stand-alone Israel aid bill being considered by the House of Representatives not only fails to include any such safeguards, but would reduce already insufficient opportunities for Congressional oversight of weapons sales to Israel under federal law. The White House’s issuance of National Security Memorandum 20 (NSM-20) requiring foreign military aid recipients like Israel to adhere to relevant international humanitarian and US law was a step in the right direction, but not a sufficient replacement for durable, statutorily binding safeguards – especially in light of the Biden administration’s resistance to enforcing either existing law or, thus far, NSM-20 with regard to Israel.

With a per capita GDP greater than that of the UK, Canada and Japan – and more than twelve times that of Ukraine — Israel has not made the case to Congress or American taxpayers that it will be unable to carry out essential, legitimate defense activities without the level of financial assistance specified in the bill. Such extraordinary additional subsidization is especially inappropriate in light of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s government continuing to spend Israel’s own funds in connection with accelerating efforts to seize and permanently control territory in the occupied West Bank, including the largest expropriation of Palestinian land in the 30 years since the Oslo Accords. Helping Israel finance missile and air defense systems if it was unable to pay for them itself would be entirely reasonable. But providing ever-increasing amounts to fund the deadly munitions and other weapons Israel is deploying in Gaza is not. While Israel openly rejects US requests to use such arms appropriately, desist from violations of Palestinian rights in the West Bank, and refrain from further escalations with Iran, increasing US financing rewards rather than disincentivizes such Israeli actions that run counter to American interests.

Additionally, as Gaza’s civilian population faces a crisis of starvation and disease, the Israel aid bill unconscionably reinforces the recently legislated prohibition on US contributions to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) – the main provider of lifesaving aid and services in the territory — even as it provides a welcome increase in global humanitarian aid. UNRWA has already fired the 12 low-level staff alleged to have participated in the October 7 attacks and has committed to helping hold them fully accountable if the ongoing investigation confirms the allegations. Lawmakers should work urgently to reverse the funding cutoff as nearly all US partner countries have, rather than continuing to collectively punish millions of Palestinians who rely on UNRWA services, including the hundreds of thousands on the brink of famine in Gaza.

Far from addressing the growing threat to American and regional security that the war and humanitarian crisis in Gaza represent, the stand-alone Israel aid bill would cruelly exacerbate it at the very moment further Israeli escalation with Iran risks drawing the United States even deeper into another costly and avoidable quagmire in the Middle East. At this dangerous moment, lawmakers could best keep Israelis, Palestinians and others in the region — including US personnel — safe by pushing for a Gaza ceasefire that allows for massive humanitarian relief and the release of all hostages, while emphasizing the need for de-escalation in tensions with Iran.

What we’d love to hear President Biden say on Foreign Policy in his State of the Union address

In February 2021, in his first major foreign policy address as president, Biden declared the US must engage with the world “with diplomacy rooted in America’s most cherished democratic values: defending freedom, championing opportunity, upholding universal rights, respecting the rule of law, and treating every person with dignity.”

Since then, the President has made some significant progress: restoring alliances, leading a strong and calibrated response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, ending the US war in Afghanistan, attacking the corruption and violence in Latin America fueling the migration crisis. But he must finish the job.

In his State of the Union address tonight, here are five (of many) opportunities for what President Joe Biden could say if he wants to show Congress, the American people and the world that he is serious about advancing true US interests and global human security:

 

  1. There must be a ceasefire, return of all Israeli hostages and massive emergency humanitarian aid effort in Gaza. Furthermore, this administration can and must fully enforce relevant US and international law to ensure protection of civilians from indiscriminate bombardment, starvation and disease.
  2. The US response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine offers a positive case study for US engagement with the world in a way that honors our principles and advances security – but universality and consistency are necessary to safeguard the benefits. President Biden will be right to call on right-wing extremists in Congress to end their obstruction of aid to Ukraine – desperately needed aid, replete with the transparency and accountability mechanisms necessary to ensure the American public and the world can scrutinize its rightful use. Consistent adherence to international law will only strengthen his case.
  3. China and our allies in Asia alike must know that Americans’ highest aspirations for the Pacific are that the world’s most populous region be one of peace, prosperity and unlimited potential. The US-China relationship is not zero-sum. Tensions are inevitable, but escalation and war are a choice. While we will never shy away from defending the democratic and human rights of all in the region, our priority is to coexist and cooperate on our many areas of shared interest.
  4. The man-made climate crisis is here. The only reasonable discussion to have is how to minimize and mitigate it effectively and fairly – that means we and international partners must commitment to aggressive multilateral carbon reduction goals, massive public investment in a just and sustainable transition away from fossil fuels – including breaking the harmful feedback loop between militarism and climate change – and the equitable sharing of burdens of climate and other ecological change impacts.
  5. We must make clear that the survival of not only democracy around the globe, but the American experiment itself depends on whether we succeed in countering rising ultranationalism, autocracy, kleptocracy, oligarchy and corruption – as well as the inherent inequality, discrimination, repression and economic precarity that comes with them.

The President has an opportunity tonight to demonstrate that he is the leader that the people of this and other nations want and deserve – the leader that earned him praise and support in years past. To do that, we must stop repeating the failures of the past, especially when it comes to foreign policy.