The Goal for U.S. Diplomacy With Israel: First Calm, Then Peace
With dangers rising across the Middle East, America needs a two-phase effort to stabilize the conflict in Gaza and resolve core Israeli-Palestinian issues.
THE SATURDAY ESSAY - by Richard Haass - Oct. 20, 2023
As recently as a few weeks ago, the Middle East seemed relatively calm. The principal story coming out of the long-troubled region was a positive one, the possible normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. At the same time, there looked to be hope that the U.S. and Iran were working to place an informal ceiling on the scale of Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for some limited sanctions relief.
All this and more is now among the many casualties of Oct. 7, when Hamas militants stormed an unprepared Israel, killing more than 1,300 people and taking several hundred hostages. Israel has responded with aerial strikes on Gaza meant to degrade Hamas’s military capability, as well as by cutting off supplies of electricity, food, water and fuel. Israel has called on the Palestinian population to relocate away from the north of Gaza, allowing its military to act against Hamas strongholds with greater freedom and fewer civilian casualties.
The initial U.S. response to the Hamas attack was full-throated support for Israel, both rhetorically and in the provision of military aid. In just a matter of days, however, that support became somewhat more conditional, with President Biden making clear his opposition to a full-scale invasion and occupation of Gaza. During his brief visit to Israel this week, Biden called for Israeli restraint both in allowing humanitarian aid to enter Gaza and in avoiding military operations that would hurt civilians, themes reiterated in his Oct. 19 Oval Office address. The administration is clearly worried that Israel’s plans could otherwise lead to a wider war, one that at a minimum would draw down already-stretched U.S. munitions stockpiles, increase the price of oil, cause the U.S. reputational problems with much of the so-called Global South, and possibly lead to direct U.S. military involvement.
There are already calls for an Israeli cease-fire, calls that will mount by the day. Israel will understandably resist them until it judges that it has significantly degraded Hamas, to punish it for the Oct. 7 attacks and to limit its ability to carry out additional terrorism. These aims are legitimate. But the U.S. needs to press Israel to set achievable goals that will allow for a cease-fire in the near term, almost certainly before Hamas is eliminated. The proper role for the U.S. is not to try to prevent a significant Israeli military action, which is all but inevitable, but to shape its scale and duration.
This will be anything but easy, given the understandable desire in Israel to crush Hamas. But as the U.S. learned the hard way after 9/11, and as noted by President Biden Thursday night, those making national security decisions must focus not just on the next move but the move after and the move after that. As Israel’s closest friend and ally, America owes Israel its best counsel.
In the wake of the president’s visit, the U.S. should adopt a two-phase strategy. The initial phase, effectively under way, is to try to prevent a bad situation from deteriorating further. One rule of much Middle East history is that things get worse before they get even worse. The goal now is to see this rule broken and stabilize the situation, to provide time and space for attempting more ambitious diplomacy.
For the time being, calls for a cease-fire could be managed in two ways. One is for Israel to minimize civilian casualties by coming to limit military actions to precision strikes, when there is actionable intelligence, and small ground raids. Second, Israel can agree to pauses in the air war to allow for food and other humanitarian supplies to reach Gaza’s civilian residents and to facilitate hostage exchanges. Such pauses could be conditioned on Hamas and other groups agreeing to pauses in their rocket attacks on Israel. Israel should be pressed to accept a cease-fire when it becomes apparent the costs of continued conflict outweigh any benefits.
In addition, getting as many hostages out of Gaza as quickly as possible is a must. The least likely path is armed rescue, which requires a mix of intelligence, stealth, surprise and skill that is hard to produce. Trying could well lead to more casualties and hostages. The more realistic path for freeing hostages will be exchanging them for Hamas or other Palestinian prisoners held in Israel.
Once the situation is stabilized, when something close to the status quo before Oct. 7 is achieved, U.S. diplomacy should move to a second phase, which would involve a renewed effort to normalize ties between Israel and Saudi Arabia and between Israel and those Palestinians willing to eschew terrorism. This two-phased approach is reminiscent of what took place after Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack on Israel 50 years ago, in the Yom Kippur War.
The U.S., in the person of Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, did not initially set out to create peace. Instead, the goal was to stabilize the situation, to arrange a cease-fire and then a separation of forces. Disengagement agreements between Israel and both Egypt and Syria were negotiated. Peace, though, did not actually come about between Israel and Egypt for another five years, while formal peace between Israel and Syria never materialized, although a fairly stable border was established.
What might an initial diplomatic phase try to accomplish today? The U.S. should continue to provide Israel with the munitions and intelligence it needs, while advising Israel to forgo a large-scale invasion and occupation of Gaza. Such an assault would result in significant Israeli casualties and would likely fail to eliminate Hamas. Indeed, a massive Israeli show of force, while weakening Hamas, might also strengthen it by generating new recruits.
We have already seen how images of civilian casualties threaten U.S. and Israeli relations with the Arab world, playing into the hands of Iran and its proxies and creating new opportunities for China and Russia. On Oct. 17, just before Biden’s visit to Israel, a hospital compound in Gaza City was struck by one or more missiles, resulting in many casualties. Israel was widely blamed for what happened, even though subsequently released intelligence strongly suggests the missile was launched by Palestinian Islamic Jihad, another Iran-backed terrorist group in Gaza. In much of the world, horror over the events of Oct. 7 has been joined or even replaced by anger over those of Oct. 17.
Another reason to oppose a large Israeli invasion is that intense fighting in Gaza with images of Palestinian civilian casualties would be all but certain to induce Hezbollah to launch thousands of rockets into northern and central Israel, thereby widening the war. The U.S. should let Iran know that it will be held accountable if Hezbollah does this, and that the U.S. response would include new sanctions against Iran that would extend to major importers of Iranian oil, to include China. The Biden administration should also make this clear to China, in an attempt to enlist its help in restraining Iran.
Some will argue that Israel should not accept any agreement that allows Hamas to maintain its role in Gaza. But the idea that an Israeli occupation could midwife a successor authority that would have any local political legitimacy is far-fetched. So too is the idea that the Palestinian Authority, Arab governments or the United Nations could or would step in to effectively govern Gaza.
It is also important to keep in mind that the principal damage done on Oct. 7 was not from the air but on the ground. A priority for Israel presumably will be to rebuild its defenses in its southwest opposite Gaza. Defense must be made to work even if deterrence periodically breaks down. Indeed, there would not be a crisis right now if defense had worked as it ought to have on Oct. 7. Israel cannot change the DNA of Hamas, but it can severely limit the group’s ability to realize its aims.
Bringing about a degree of calm and stability would make it possible to revive diplomatic efforts to deal with core Israeli-Palestinian issues, which must be resolved if what happened this month is not to occur again and again. For Israel, an open-ended occupation of some five million Palestinians is a threat to its identity and to its relations with the West. It is a no-win situation: Either Israel refuses to grant Palestinians political rights and comes to be seen by many as undemocratic, or it does grant such rights and is no longer a Jewish state. For Palestinians, a state would give them some of what they seek but far from all. To paraphrase what Churchill said about democracy, a two-state solution remains the worst possible outcome for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict except for all the others.
Policy change will be extraordinarily difficult. Whatever support there was in Israel for compromise with the Palestinians is seriously diminished after Oct. 7. Doves are few and far between. There is little public confidence in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who will surely be the target of multiple official inquiries into the intelligence and defense failures leading to the attacks.
What makes it potentially doable is that Hamas would play no role in negotiations about the Palestinian future. The focus should be on developing a Palestinian partner in the West Bank, one willing to renounce violence and live alongside Israel. If this enterprise succeeds, over time it could lead to a viable state, one that would offer an alternative path for Palestinians in both the West Bank and Gaza to what Hamas represents.
The U.S. will also have to work to develop an Israeli partner. Before Oct. 7, Netanyahu’s right-wing government was opposed to any accommodation with Palestinians; the current national unity government is configured for prosecuting war. What will be required once the crisis passes are new debates and elections in Israel. America’s voice will be critical, including on the necessity of reining in settlements.
The U.S. and Israel have a potential partner in this endeavor: the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The Saudi leadership is still interested in obtaining a civilian nuclear energy program from the U.S., and even more intent on a Senate-approved security pact. Normalization with Israel, the third element of the package, has been paused owing to recent events, but could be revived.
One lesson the Saudis, and above all Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, have learned is that they cannot safely ignore the Palestinian issue. Here they can take a page out of what the U.A.E. did when it normalized ties with Israel—namely, linking normalization to Israel accepting conditions on its policy toward the Palestinians. The Saudis could demand restraints on settlements, greater interim Palestinian self-governance, and/or some commitment on the territorial reach of a potential state. They could offer resources to help the fledgling entity. A Saudi offer along these lines would force the Israeli government and Israeli society to debate priorities and to choose between a greater Israel and a greater peace.
Again, this second diplomatic phase can only be launched once there is a semblance of order. That requires a cease-fire. No Israeli occupation. Deterrence of Iran and no wider war. No humanitarian crisis. No hostages. It is a daunting agenda. But at least it is under way.
About: Richard Haass is president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations and a senior counselor at Centerview Partners. He is the author of “The Bill of Obligations: The Ten Habits of Good Citizens,” among other books.
+++++++++++++
Qatar Is the Mideast’s Honest Broker
We don’t endorse Hamas and have been targets of a campaign of disinformation.
By Meshal bin Hamad Al?Thani
领英推荐
(Mr. Al Thani is Qatar’s ambassador to the U.S.)
Oct. 29, 2023
Qatar doesn’t want another war in our region. Our objectives since the start of the current conflict have been clear: to secure the release of the hostages, establish humanitarian corridors for essential aid to Palestinian civilians, and to end the bloodshed and prevent further escalation.
Over the past two decades, our nation has cultivated a reputation for mediating complex disputes. Lasting peace can be achieved only by building trust and understanding. The foundation of our success has been our ability to engage with all sides.
Following the escalation in Gaza, Qatar is in contact with all parties, urging calm. Our international partners such as the U.S. have asked us to mediate to secure the release of more hostages. We have been engaged with Israel, other countries and Hamas. The release of several hostages as a result of Qatar’s mediation is a positive step, but the situation remains delicate.
It is therefore deeply unsettling that false narratives about Qatar have emerged in the media with the apparent intention of escalating the conflict. These narratives create obstacles for constructive mediation efforts and aim to derail negotiations. Almost as soon as the conflict began, Qatar became the target of a sustained disinformation campaign about the nature of our role as a mediator for peace in the region. These campaigns have spread falsehoods about the purpose of the Hamas political office in Doha and the financial aid that Qatar provides to Palestinians. “Commentators” assert that Qatar is a funder and sponsor of Hamas—which is untrue.
The Hamas political office in Qatar was opened in 2012 after a request from Washington to establish indirect lines of communication with Hamas.
The office has frequently been used in mediation efforts, helping to de-escalate conflicts in Israel and the Palestinian territories.
The presence of the Hamas office shouldn’t be confused with endorsement but rather establishes an important channel for indirect communication. Qatar’s pursuit of dialogue has always been conducted in coordination with our international partners, and our priority has always been peace and stability in our region.
Further, all humanitarian aid from Qatar to Gaza is delivered directly to Palestinian families, while additional Qatari funding provides electricity to power the homes of Gaza’s two million people. Qatari aid is distributed in full coordination with Israel, the U.S. and United Nations agencies such as the World Food Program and the Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process. It is subject to strict guarantees and controls along its route through Israel into Gaza.
The release of several hostages over the past week shows that Qatar’s policy of engaging with all sides can yield positive results. Avoiding the further loss of civilian lives and securing the release of hostages should be the priority for all. Open channels of communication can lead to lasting peace. Qatar will continue to pursue such engagement, supported by the U.S. and other partners around the world.
Mr. Al Thani is Qatar’s ambassador to the U.S.
++++++++
Mike Pence Makes a Gracious Exit
The former Vice President leaves the presidential race as a politician who put his country first.
By The Editorial Board - Oct. 29, 2023
Journal Editorial Report: The former VP goes out as a politician who put his country first. Meanwhile, Biden's spending is now Mike Johnson's problem. Images: Zuma Press Composite: Mark Kelly---
Mike Pence’s decision to end his presidential campaign on Saturday was a recognition of political reality and the need to consolidate the GOP field against Donald Trump. Others will have to follow his lead, preferably before the end of the year.
“Traveling across the country over the past six months, I came here to say it’s become clear to me, this is not my time,” the former Vice President said in Las Vegas at the Republican Jewish Coalition summit.
By temperament and experience, Mr. Pence would make a good President. But his campaign of traditional conservative policies and civility never caught on. MAGA voters wouldn’t forgive him for standing up to Mr. Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election, while anti-Trump voters wouldn’t forgive his four years as Mr. Trump’s loyal number two.
Mr. Pence deserved better because in personnel choices and policy advice he was crucial to the successes Mr. Trump had as President. He steered the former President toward his better cabinet choices and advisers, such as education secretary Betsy DeVos. If he was sometimes too wincingly loyal amid Mr. Trump’s impulsive policy riffs—Kim Jong Un is a helluva guy—that was the price of maintaining influence behind the scenes.
Critics who say he should never have accepted the VP nod should thank heaven he was there on Jan. 6, 2021. Mr. Pence stood up to Mr. Trump’s public and private pressure to stop the electoral vote count. He followed his conscience to recognize the constitutional limits of his role, and he did the right thing in a political crucible, though he had to know he was damaging his future presidential prospects. He deserves the public’s gratitude.
Mr. Pence also made a contribution this year in calling out the drift among some of his GOP competitors toward isolationism. He may have been the wrong messenger, but he offered a message that Republican voters should hear about Russia, Iran, China and an unprepared America. Hamas’s murderous invasion of Israel is a reminder of what can happen when a nation begins to believe it is safe from its enemies behind walls—or two oceans.
Mr. Pence didn’t endorse another candidate, but perhaps he will as the primaries approach. Mr. Trump said Saturday that Mr. Pence should endorse him as an act of loyalty for having chosen him as his running mate, but Mr. Trump betrayed Mr. Pence with his post-election pressure to betray the VP’s oath of office.
The GOP nominating race is frozen for now, with Mr. Trump maintaining a big lead and everyone else far behind. Many Republican voters have been sticking with Mr. Trump as a rebuke to the Democratic prosecutors who have indicted him four times.
But many of those same voters also say they are open to someone else. A surprising candidate usually breaks out as the voting approaches in Iowa. If someone does surge, the pressure will be on the others to get out. As Mr. Pence has done during his admirable career, the laggards will have to put the country above their political ambition.
The End+++++++++++