The plan reportedly presented to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken last month would have major advantages for Israel and basically for all sides, except Hamas. A wiser government not subordinate to Netanyahu’s specific political needs and legal difficulties would grab it.
Increasingly, many in Israel are casting doubt on the idea that the twin goals of the Gaza war – removing Hamas and retrieving the 100+ hostages – are compatible. It is true that the military warned all along that the fight would be a long one, but that doesn’t mean that such a fight is the only path.
Many fear that a prolonged war, perhaps lasting throughout all of 2024, would entail a series of excruciating costs, including the sacrifice of the hostages, the deaths of many hundreds more soldiers, a hammer blow to the economy, and the devastation of Israel’s standing around the world. If the government persists in its rejectionism, add to that a conflict with the Biden administration, which would be strategically calamitous.
What the plan offers
Meanwhile, while details must still be finalized and could be influenced if Israel were to engage, here’s a quick overview of the plan that appears to be on offer:
1. It would end the war with its costs to life on both sides and to the economy.
2. It would achieve the return of the hostages which many, including probably most Israelis, want prioritized.
3. It would mobilize Saudi Arabia, moderate countries in the Gulf and the region, and all of the West behind Israel’s goal of ridding Gaza of Hamas rule.
4. It aspires to involve Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries in the pacification and reconstruction of Gaza, aligning their interests with those of Israel and away from Hamas – a major strategic breakthrough.
5. It would formalize the path toward peace with Saudi Arabia, whose strategic, economic, and political benefits are incalculable for Israel, the Saudis, and the region, thus cementing an alliance against Iran and its proxies.
6. It would likely end the active conflict with Hezbollah and enable Israel to focus on the diplomatic effort to implement UNSC Resolution 1701 and push back its forces from the border.
7. It would probably end the Houthi outrage in the Red Sea, which would be very much appreciated by Egypt, which relies on the Suez Canal for much of its foreign currency, and by the world, which relies on it for an eighth of its global trade.
WHAT ISRAEL must do in exchange is to agree to enter into a promise that would restore a rejuvenated Palestinian Authority to Gaza, and to agree to the principle of a two-state solution. Netanyahu presents this as an unacceptable cost. But in fact, this too is a benefit.
After the October 7 Hamas invasion from Gaza, Israelis are understandably jittery about handing territory over to anyone. But Israel is not being asked to pull troops out of the West Bank fully by tomorrow but to enter into a process that will lead to partition and some version of Palestinian independence.
That is something that has already been accepted by every one of Netanyahu’s predecessors dating back to 1993, and was indeed accepted by Netanyahu himself in the Bar Ilan speech of 2009 (though one may suspect he was dissembling).
And it is something Israel itself needs because if it controlled the West Bank and Gaza in perpetuity, it would already be a Jewish-minority country; and if it refused voting rights to the majority it would be a pariah and would ultimately have its hand forced by the outside world.
There is no other pathway for an export-leaning economy that is surrounded by potentially hostile neighbors and is hugely reliant on a US military and diplomatic umbrella. Ignoring this in the name of ideology or the principle of self-reliance is idiocy.
Countering the arguement ‘but Hamas hasn’t accepted!’
One may argue that all this is irrelevant because Hamas itself hasn’t accepted the deal. Indeed, Hamas has so far conditioned a release of the hostages on a return to the status quo ante – which Israel is right to reject, and which the Western world, under the right circumstances, ought to back Israel in rejecting.
Israel should accept the US plan, and make sure it is framed in such a way as to bring the region, and the world, behind a total delegitimizing of Hamas and a ban on its participation in any Palestinian elections.
There is no reason for Israel not to do that, and in so doing, collect the goodwill of the world, and let the pressure then shift onto Hamas. One of the basic inadequacies of the current government – and they are, of course, legion – is that they seem not to understand something so basic.
Indeed, if Israel’s government were competent at messaging if it understood the first thing about proactively driving a narrative, it would be flooding the media zone with offers to end the war immediately on the condition Hamas surrenders and releases the hostages. Israel would also be pulling together the Arab coalition to help stabilize and rebuild Gaza, and not waiting for the Americans to do it – while spitting in their face when they do.
IT IS increasingly reasonable to conclude, therefore – as many have in Israel and in the White House – that Netanyahu prefers to drag out the war, arguing that wartime is no time for changing leaders. He is a criminal defendant on trial for bribery, badly discredited by the failures of October 7, and now he faces polls that for three months have shown three-quarters of the public want him to resign. His intention is to drag things out in the hope that memories of the epic breakdown on October 7 will fade, and that Donald Trump will be returned to The White House.
Indeed, it is precisely by biting the hand of Biden, even as that hand feeds him, that Netanyahu can help bring that outcome about. This not only contradicts Israel’s interests, but projects shameful ingratitude to Biden, who flew to Israel in the days after the massacre and has steadfastly supported its response. Without that support, Israel’s position in the world, after causing so much death and destruction in Gaza, would be untenable – from the Security Council to the Hague to the basic matter of munitions supply.
Biden is paying a massive political price at home in an election year – with Muslim Americans whom he needs in Michigan, with minorities and progressives whom he needs everywhere. It is plainly helping Trump, to the horror of the world.
It doesn’t take a major cynic to work out that Netanyahu is playing for time in the hope of seeing Trump return, and with him a transactional and illiberal landscape devoid of humanitarian concerns and any pretense of decency.
There is a straight line from Netanyahu’s current conflict with Biden to his 2015 speech in Congress agitating against president Obama’s effort to reach a nuclear deal with Iran. Here’s how that worked out: Israel is an unpopular cause with the Democrat-leaning half of the US and among its youth in general – and Iran is a nuclear threshold state because Netanyahu convinced president Trump to pull out of that same deal a few years later. No benefits, only exacerbated dangers.
That more or less sums up what Netanyahu offers the country today. That he remains in power is a major calamity for the country, the region, and the world.
The writer is managing partner of the New York-based communications firm Thunder11. He is a former Cairo-based Middle East editor and London-based Europe/Africa editor of the Associated Press, former chairman of the Foreign Press Association in Jerusalem and author of two books about Israel. You can follow him at danperry.substack.com.
Comments are closed.