In the ongoing saga of geopolitical theatre surrounding Gaza, the recent episode involving the United States and its much-hyped ceasefire proposal offers a stark portrayal of diplomatic maneuvering at its most disingenuous. Russia, China and Algeria’s veto of the U.S. resolution, purportedly in the name of an immediate ceasefire, underscores the stark disparity between rhetoric and action in Washington’s approach to the crisis and the glaring chasm between political posturing and genuine commitment to peace in the region.
After vetoing three consecutive U.N. resolutions on Gaza, the United States found itself in a perplexing predicament when its own ceasefire proposal was rejected. The crux of the issue lay in the resolution’s wording, which fell short of calling for an immediate ceasefire. Instead, it merely asked to “recognize the importance” of a ceasefire and to support American negotiation efforts. This toothless gesture falls short of addressing the urgent humanitarian crisis unfolding in Gaza.
It is safe to assume that the current situation underscores the duplicitous nature of U.S. policy in the region since Washington betrayed its role as an impartial mediator by effectively endorsing Israel’s negotiation parameters due to conditioning any ceasefire on the release of all hostages—an unreasonable demand unlikely to be met by Palestine’s officials because it undermines the urgency of ending the violence and perpetrates the cycle of suffering for 2 million innocent Gaza civilians, positioning them as hostages in the geopolitical machinations.
The political motivations behind this maneuver are glaringly apparent, exposing it as not a sincere effort toward peace but a calculated move predominantly aimed at domestic optics. With the specter of impending U.S. presidential elections looming large, the Biden administration sought to appease a war-weary populace clamoring for peace. Public opinion polls reflect a palpable shift in sentiment, with a clear majority of Americans advocating for a ceasefire and expressing dwindling support for unconditional backing of Israel’s actions.
According to a survey conducted by Reuters/Ipsos in November 2023, only 32 percent of respondents advocated for unqualified backing of Israel, while a staggering 68 percent called for a ceasefire. This sentiment has only solidified in the months since, with over 70 cities in the country rallying in support of a ceasefire.
The sentiment cuts across religious and political divides, as evidenced by the findings of the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU) survey published in February 2024. Regardless of faith affiliation, a majority of Americans, including Muslims (75 percent), Catholics (71 percent), Protestants (60 percent) and even Jews (50 percent), expressed their desire for an end to the violence in Gaza.
Even among traditionally staunch supporters of Israel, such as white evangelicals, there has been a notable shift towards advocating for a ceasefire. Despite initial endorsements of Israel’s right to defend itself, 58 percent of white evangelicals now stand in favor of de-escalation, underscoring the complex and evolving nature of public attitudes towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Generational divides further highlight the shifting landscape of opinion within the United States. A February AP-NORC poll indicates that 50 percent of U.S. adults believed Israel’s military offensive had exceeded the bounds of proportionality, with significant disparities among political affiliations. While 63 percent of Democrats expressed concerns over Israel’s actions, only 33 percent of Republicans shared similar sentiments.
The emergence of social media platforms as catalysts for shaping public discourse has also played a significant role in galvanizing support for the Palestinian cause among younger generations. The proliferation of pro-Palestinian sentiment on platforms like TikTok has not gone unnoticed, prompting concerns within political circles and leading to calls for censorship and banning of the popular medium in the U.S.
The evolving landscape of public opinion is mirrored in nuanced policy preferences, as evidenced by recent surveys conducted by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and Reuters/Ipsos. Most Americans, 56 percent, favor maintaining neutrality in the conflict, with Democrats and Independents leading the charge. However, Republicans overwhelmingly support siding with Israel, reflecting deep-seated partisan divisions on the issue.
Moreover, there is growing support for imposing restrictions on U.S. military aid to Israel, with 53 percent of Americans endorsing such measures. Such sentiments, intricately intertwined with political affiliations, underscore the precarious balancing act faced by policymakers navigating the Israeli-Palestinian quagmire.
On the other hand, despite this sea of changing attitudes, a troubling lack of awareness about the human cost of the conflict remains. A Pew Research Center poll reveals that half of Americans are unaware of the vast disparity in casualties, with approximately 32,000 Palestinians and 1,200 Israelis killed since the conflict’s inception, marking a staggering ratio of 26-to-1. This underscores the disproportionate nature of the violence and the urgent need for greater transparency and accountability in media coverage and political discourse.
As the death toll mounts in Gaza, amidst these grim statistics lies a more profound moral quandary. The deliberate targeting of civilians and the systemic deprivation of basic necessities constitute clear violations of international law, with the U.N. special rapporteur on the right to food, Michael Fakhri, likening Israel’s actions to war crimes and genocide.
The recent passage of a bill in Congress that received Biden’s approval further highlights the U.S. baffling stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict. The document not only ratifies the de-funding of UNRWA, the leading humanitarian agency in the region but also pledges allocation of $3.8 billion in aid to Israel, further underscoring the moral bankruptcy of the U.S. foreign policy in the region and undermining the country’s credibility on a global stage.
If this was not enough, the passage of the same bill also conditions aid to the Palestinian Authority on refraining from obtaining U.N. membership and no cooperation with the International Criminal Court (ICC), effectively shielding Israel from any legal accountability for its actions in Gaza, further perpetuating a cycle of impunity and injustice and epitomizing the Faustian nature of this sinister bargain.
As Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will highly likely move forward with military assaults in Rafah, despite tepid warnings from President Joe Biden, the actual cost of U.S. complicity becomes increasingly apparent. Israel’s actions not only jeopardize regional stability but also undermine America’s strategic interests. Hence, the blind support for Israel may prove to be a liability rather than an asset in the long run as the international community grows increasingly disillusioned with U.S. inaction.
In fact, Gaza’s blood-soaked sands may well mark the graveyard of not only Biden’s presidency but also the Western-led rules-based order as national and international condemnation mounts and U.S. complicity becomes increasingly untenable. As the global community celebrates its Pyrrhic victory concerning the Ramadan ceasefire, the time for unequivocal action is now. The U.S. must decide which side of history it wishes to be on—for the sake of Gaza, for the sake of Israel, and most importantly, for the sake of humanity, and for the sake of its own soul.
Adriel Kasonta is a London-based political risk consultant and lawyer. You can follow him on X @Adriel_Kasonta or visit his website.
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Nikkei Editorial
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
visit website
