On Biden's visit to Israel

It would be better if he stayed away

Yesterday, Bill observed, per the Washington Post, that “the language of caution” has become part of Joe Biden’s message to Israel. In my view, Biden’s trip to Israel (he leaves today) is best understood as a means of delivering this message of caution to Israel in person.

What are the stated purposes of this trip? Secretary of State Blinken listed five purposes: (1) to affirm Israel’s right to defend itself; (2) to make clear to Israel’s enemies that they shouldn’t enter the conflict; (3) to coordinate with Israel on securing the release of hostages; (4) to receive a comprehensive briefing on Israel’s war aims and strategy; and (5) to hear from Israel how it plans to protect the lives of Palestinian “civilians” in Gaza and to make sure humanitarian aid reaches them.

In this post, I will try to show that the first stated purpose — which I think is just window dressing — is at cross purposes with some of the others. The last three purposes are at the heart of the matter, and they amount to an attempt by Biden to constrain Israel’s right to defend itself.

In fact, it’s possible that just by visiting Israel, Biden will constrain it. The Israelis aren’t going to launch an assault on Gaza while Biden is in Israel or anywhere else in the Middle East.

I don’t know that Israel wanted to begin its ground war in that time frame; nor am I impatient for that war to begin. Hamas has had at least a year to plan its defense, so there’s nothing wrong with Israel taking a few weeks to plan its attack — while pounding Gaza to “soften” the battleground — if that’s what its military leaders believe is necessary.

However, the decision when to begin the ground war should be based entirely on military considerations. Biden’s visit adds an extraneous factor.

As for the visit’s purposes, alleged and real, there is no need for Biden to affirm Israel’s right to defend itself. Biden affirmed it on Tuesday of last week in very strong terms.

Nor is there any need for Biden to make clear to Israel’s enemies that entering the conflict would be a big mistake. Biden did that in his Tuesday speech. More importantly, the presence of U.S. war ships in the region sends the same message.

The third purpose — coordinating with Israel on how to get hostages out of Gaza — is certainly something the U.S. should do. Whether Biden needs to be involved and whether, if involved, he needs to be Israel are different matters.

When it comes to the hostages, the interests of Israel and U.S. (or at least Biden) diverge. For Israel, the top priority is crushing Hamas. Saving hostages, including Israeli hostages, is important, but secondary.

For Biden, saving U.S. hostages is Job One. If American hostages return safely at some point after Biden has visited Israel, it will help his standing at home more than almost anything I can imagine.

The U.S., too, has a huge interest in the safety of the dozen or two American hostages. One can debate whether, from a purely American point of view, saving those hostages is more important in the long run than crushing Hamas. But it’s clear that in balancing these two goals, saving hostages has higher priority for the U.S. than for the Israelis, who have everything to lose if Hamas isn’t crushed.

All of this is a long way of trying to show that Biden’s third purpose in visiting Israel — saving hostages — likely means trying to constrain Israel. It’s consistent with that “language of caution” the Post says has “crept into Biden’s message to Israel.”

Biden’s fourth purpose is to receive a briefing on Israel’s war plans. Fair enough. But given his third purpose and his fifth (which I’ll get to next), it’s likely that Biden and his team will want a say in those plans.

This, they shouldn’t get. Israel is at war with Hamas. The U.S. isn’t. It hasn’t declared war or stated any intention to fight one. Moreover, Israel’s security depends on the outcome of this war. America’s doesn’t —not nearly as directly.

Accordingly, while it’s okay for the U.S. to receive a comprehensive briefing from Israel, I see the briefing as an avenue Biden can use to attempt to constrain Israel — an attempt he shouldn’t make.

The final purpose is probably where the greatest potential for mischief resides. It’s about getting humanitarian aid to Palestinian civilians in Gaza and protecting them from harm during the battle there.

The humanitarian aid part is noble, but not something Israel, as opposed to humanitarian organizations, should be focused on now. The protecting civilians in the battle part is what I see as problematic.

Until recently, the administration’s line on this — as articulated by Secretary of Defense Austin, for example — has been that Israel is committed to abiding by the laws of war and its forces, being highly professional, can be relied on to fulfill that commitment. That’s the right line and it’s “enough said.” If more was needed, Israel provided it with the warning to Palestinians to leave northern Gaza.

By visiting Israel to discuss the protection of civilians, Biden undercuts expressions of confidence that Israel will abide by the laws of war. In addition, it’s quite possible that he will attempt to add constraints to the way Israel fights Hamas in the streets and tunnels of Gaza City.

Biden is using his visit in the hope of being all things to all people. He wants the visit to show that he’s a great supporter of Israel. (Purposes 1 and 2). He wants it to show that he’s a great protector of human rights (Purpose 5). He wants it to show that he’s a hands-on military strategist (Purpose 4). And he wants to be able to take credit for the safe return of American hostages, if it happens (Purpose 3).

The problem is that Purposes 1 and 2 are at cross purposes (or at least in tension) with Purpose 5 and to some extent Purposes 3 and 4. Biden can’t be a wholehearted supporter of Israel’s right to defend itself and at the same time be looking to restrain the way Israel goes after Hamas.

One or the other of these postures isn’t fully genuine. I believe it’s the wholehearted-supporter-of-Israel’s-right-to-defend-itself posture that’s fake.