Secretary of State Antony Blinken urged “all parties [to] make the right choices” ahead of Iran’s expected attack on Israel, as U.S. officials work to avert the eruption of a regional war.
“All parties must take steps to ease tensions,” Blinken said Monday at the State Department. “It is urgent that all parties make the right choices in the hours and days ahead.”
Iran has promised to retaliate against Israel for the assassination of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh, who was killed last week while attending the Iranian presidential inauguration. President Joe Biden has ordered the movement of “vessels and aircraft across the Middle East” in a bid to deter or intercept an Iranian attack.
“Of course, we prepare for the possibility of further conflict,” State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said earlier Monday. “We don’t think conflict is inevitable or should be inevitable, or that increased conflict is inevitable. We’re going to continue to work to try to prevent it from happening. But of course we prepare for all possibilities.”
Secretary of State Antony Blinken, right, speaks during a signing ceremony with Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong at the State Department, Monday, Aug. 5, 2024, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein).
Yet Israeli officials have received a message from Iran that some kind of attack will go forward. “Iran has informed us that it intends to attack Israel,” Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz said.
The scope and scale of the attack remain uncertain, but Israeli hospitals reportedly are preparing for “mass casualty” scenarios.
“The drill was successful, preparing us for a total communications blackout,” Israel’s national emergency medical service chief, Eli Bin, told the Times of Israel.
The crisis threatens to bring about the second direct attack on Israel from Iran since Oct. 7, when the Iran-backed terrorist organization Hamas broke out of Gaza and attacked military outposts and civilian communities across southern Israel — a conflict that contains the potential to convulse the Middle East in a wider conflict between Israel and Iran, its proxy Lebanese Hezbollah, or both.
“Since Oct. 7 we have planned for all of the possible contingencies, including the broadening of this conflict, including the escalation of this conflict,” Miller said. “Our posture as it relates to American citizens in Lebanon today is that we recommend that U.S. citizens who can depart Lebanon find a way to do so.”
In parallel, Iran’s new president, Masoud Pezeshkian, welcomed a senior Russian security official to Tehran to discuss their burgeoning relationship.
“Russia has always been with Iran in difficult times and strengthening relations with such a strategic partner is one of the priorities in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s foreign policy,” Pezeshkian said, according to a Russian state media translation.
Biden’s team has “urge[d] countries to pass messages to Iran,” as Miller acknowledged, but he cast doubt on the idea that Moscow would participate in that effort.
“We don’t have any expectations that Russia’s going to play a productive role in de-escalating tensions,” he said. “We haven’t seen them play a productive role in this conflict since Oct. 7. They have for the most part been absent, and certainly we’ve seen them do nothing to urge any party to take de-escalatory steps.”
2024-08-05 22:00:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fpolicy%2Fforeign-policy%2F3111406%2Fblinken-tells-israel-iran-make-right-choices-hours-ahead%2F?w=600&h=450, Secretary of State Antony Blinken urged “all parties [to] make the right choices” ahead of Iran’s expected attack on Israel, as U.S. officials work to avert the eruption of a regional war. “All parties must take steps to ease tensions,” Blinken said Monday at the State Department. “It is urgent that all parties make the,
Secretary of State Antony Blinken urged “all parties [to] make the right choices” ahead of Iran’s expected attack on Israel, as U.S. officials work to avert the eruption of a regional war.
“All parties must take steps to ease tensions,” Blinken said Monday at the State Department. “It is urgent that all parties make the right choices in the hours and days ahead.”
Iran has promised to retaliate against Israel for the assassination of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh, who was killed last week while attending the Iranian presidential inauguration. President Joe Biden has ordered the movement of “vessels and aircraft across the Middle East” in a bid to deter or intercept an Iranian attack.
“Of course, we prepare for the possibility of further conflict,” State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said earlier Monday. “We don’t think conflict is inevitable or should be inevitable, or that increased conflict is inevitable. We’re going to continue to work to try to prevent it from happening. But of course we prepare for all possibilities.”
Secretary of State Antony Blinken, right, speaks during a signing ceremony with Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong at the State Department, Monday, Aug. 5, 2024, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein).
Yet Israeli officials have received a message from Iran that some kind of attack will go forward. “Iran has informed us that it intends to attack Israel,” Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz said.
The scope and scale of the attack remain uncertain, but Israeli hospitals reportedly are preparing for “mass casualty” scenarios.
“The drill was successful, preparing us for a total communications blackout,” Israel’s national emergency medical service chief, Eli Bin, told the Times of Israel.
The crisis threatens to bring about the second direct attack on Israel from Iran since Oct. 7, when the Iran-backed terrorist organization Hamas broke out of Gaza and attacked military outposts and civilian communities across southern Israel — a conflict that contains the potential to convulse the Middle East in a wider conflict between Israel and Iran, its proxy Lebanese Hezbollah, or both.
“Since Oct. 7 we have planned for all of the possible contingencies, including the broadening of this conflict, including the escalation of this conflict,” Miller said. “Our posture as it relates to American citizens in Lebanon today is that we recommend that U.S. citizens who can depart Lebanon find a way to do so.”
In parallel, Iran’s new president, Masoud Pezeshkian, welcomed a senior Russian security official to Tehran to discuss their burgeoning relationship.
“Russia has always been with Iran in difficult times and strengthening relations with such a strategic partner is one of the priorities in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s foreign policy,” Pezeshkian said, according to a Russian state media translation.
Biden’s team has “urge[d] countries to pass messages to Iran,” as Miller acknowledged, but he cast doubt on the idea that Moscow would participate in that effort.
“We don’t have any expectations that Russia’s going to play a productive role in de-escalating tensions,” he said. “We haven’t seen them play a productive role in this conflict since Oct. 7. They have for the most part been absent, and certainly we’ve seen them do nothing to urge any party to take de-escalatory steps.”
, Secretary of State Antony Blinken urged “all parties [to] make the right choices” ahead of Iran’s expected attack on Israel, as U.S. officials work to avert the eruption of a regional war. “All parties must take steps to ease tensions,” Blinken said Monday at the State Department. “It is urgent that all parties make the right choices in the hours and days ahead.” Iran has promised to retaliate against Israel for the assassination of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh, who was killed last week while attending the Iranian presidential inauguration. President Joe Biden has ordered the movement of “vessels and aircraft across the Middle East” in a bid to deter or intercept an Iranian attack. “Of course, we prepare for the possibility of further conflict,” State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said earlier Monday. “We don’t think conflict is inevitable or should be inevitable, or that increased conflict is inevitable. We’re going to continue to work to try to prevent it from happening. But of course we prepare for all possibilities.” Secretary of State Antony Blinken, right, speaks during a signing ceremony with Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong at the State Department, Monday, Aug. 5, 2024, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein). Yet Israeli officials have received a message from Iran that some kind of attack will go forward. “Iran has informed us that it intends to attack Israel,” Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz said. The scope and scale of the attack remain uncertain, but Israeli hospitals reportedly are preparing for “mass casualty” scenarios. “The drill was successful, preparing us for a total communications blackout,” Israel’s national emergency medical service chief, Eli Bin, told the Times of Israel. The crisis threatens to bring about the second direct attack on Israel from Iran since Oct. 7, when the Iran-backed terrorist organization Hamas broke out of Gaza and attacked military outposts and civilian communities across southern Israel — a conflict that contains the potential to convulse the Middle East in a wider conflict between Israel and Iran, its proxy Lebanese Hezbollah, or both. “Since Oct. 7 we have planned for all of the possible contingencies, including the broadening of this conflict, including the escalation of this conflict,” Miller said. “Our posture as it relates to American citizens in Lebanon today is that we recommend that U.S. citizens who can depart Lebanon find a way to do so.” In parallel, Iran’s new president, Masoud Pezeshkian, welcomed a senior Russian security official to Tehran to discuss their burgeoning relationship. “Russia has always been with Iran in difficult times and strengthening relations with such a strategic partner is one of the priorities in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s foreign policy,” Pezeshkian said, according to a Russian state media translation. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER Biden’s team has “urge[d] countries to pass messages to Iran,” as Miller acknowledged, but he cast doubt on the idea that Moscow would participate in that effort. “We don’t have any expectations that Russia’s going to play a productive role in de-escalating tensions,” he said. “We haven’t seen them play a productive role in this conflict since Oct. 7. They have for the most part been absent, and certainly we’ve seen them do nothing to urge any party to take de-escalatory steps.”, , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/blinken-penny-wong.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is “looking at” withdrawing a legal argument lodged by the United Kingdom’s previous leadership against the International Criminal Court prosecutor’s indictment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his office acknowledged Thursday.
“It is for the prosecutor and the court to make a decision,” a spokeswoman in Starmer’s office told British media. “Now, with regard to the previous government’s proposals around a submission, we are looking at that but I don’t have any further updates.”
Starmer, a Labour Party leader, came to power just weeks ago following a landslide election that ended 14 years of Conservative Party rule. That victory marked the culmination of a turn in Labour’s political fortunes that began in 2020 with the ouster of then-Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who was widely perceived as indulgent of antisemitism in the party. Yet his government also faces political pressure from left-wing pro-Palestinian voters, not unlike the dilemmas that have hampered President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris during the U.S. presidential season.
“I fully supported the U.K.’s role in defending Israel when Iran launched its unprecedented attack, and I utterly condemn the Houthi attack on Tel Aviv overnight,” British Foreign Secretary David Lammy told the House of Commons last week. “There are also those who, like me, represent constituents who are convinced that the world does not understand the depth of Palestinian suffering. … I understand both those perspectives. I recognize the pain and anguish felt on all sides. It makes me only more determined to do all I can in this office to advance the cause of peace.”
Britain’s Labour Party Prime Minister Keir Starmer speaking upon being elected earlier in July. Starmer is “looking at” withdrawing a legal argument lodged by the U.K.’s previous leadership against the International Criminal Court prosecutor’s indictment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (AP)
Western attempts to balance those political and policy priorities have been complicated by ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan, who unveiled indictments of Hamas leaders paired with charges against Netanyahu and his defense minister, Yoav Gallant, in May. Khan accused the Israeli leaders of “intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population,” but Israeli officials maintain that the civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip are a consequence of Hamas’ tactics.
“Senior Hamas official Fathi Hamad … boasted that Palestinian women and children excel at being human shields,” Netanyahu said during his joint address to Congress, referring to a speech given by a Hamas leader in 2008. “They actually want Palestinian civilians to die, so that Israel will be smeared in the international media and be pressured to end the war before it’s won.”
Then-British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak denounced the indictment, in part on the grounds that “the ICC does not have jurisdiction” over Israel. His team urged the ICC’s pretrial chamber to reject Khan’s request for warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant, but Starmer’s government “is expected to drop the previous government’s objections,” according to the New York Times, which reported Starmer’s team might be “edging away from” the U.S. approach to the war.
“We reject the overall characterization in that piece,” the Starmer spokeswoman said. “The Government has been clear about Israel’s right to self-defense and its right to respond to a terror attack in line with international humanitarian law. We’ve been in lockstep with the US on this matter and also in our efforts with the US and other allies in terms of promoting regional stability.”
Biden rejected Khan’s allegations as “outrageous” in May, saying that “it’s clear Israel wants to do all it can to ensure civilian protection.” The jurisdictional dispute also has wider ramifications for other countries in disputes with the ICC.
“This is an own goal for Britain,” Foundation for Defense of Democracies senior adviser Richard Goldberg, the Trump White House National Security Council’s lead official for countering Iran’s nuclear program, told the Washington Examiner. “There’s no jurisdiction for the ICC to come after the British military let alone Israel, which is both a fellow democracy and a nonmember. Starmer may think he is appeasing a pro-Hamas base in Labour, but he’s actually putting American and British troops in the ICC crosshairs.”
Lammy said last week that the Starmer government’s response to the ICC and demands to halt arms sales to Israel will depend on the results of a “quasi-legal process” of consultations across the government. And he signaled that the government might change course, but not as much as some leftist supporters want.
“Israel is surrounded by people who would see its annihilation — it is being attacked by the Houthis, Hezbollah are firing missiles, and Hamas want to wipe it off the map,” he said. “For those reasons, it would not be right to have a blanket ban between our countries and Israel. What is right is for me to consider in the normal way the issues in relation to offensive weapons in Gaza, following the quasi-judicial process that I have outlined.”
2024-07-25 21:32:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fnews%2Fworld%2F3099936%2Fstarmer-might-defer-to-icc-over-charges-against-netanyahu%2F?w=600&h=450, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is “looking at” withdrawing a legal argument lodged by the United Kingdom’s previous leadership against the International Criminal Court prosecutor’s indictment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his office acknowledged Thursday. “It is for the prosecutor and the court to make a decision,” a spokeswoman in Starmer’s office told British,
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is “looking at” withdrawing a legal argument lodged by the United Kingdom’s previous leadership against the International Criminal Court prosecutor’s indictment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his office acknowledged Thursday.
“It is for the prosecutor and the court to make a decision,” a spokeswoman in Starmer’s office told British media. “Now, with regard to the previous government’s proposals around a submission, we are looking at that but I don’t have any further updates.”
Starmer, a Labour Party leader, came to power just weeks ago following a landslide election that ended 14 years of Conservative Party rule. That victory marked the culmination of a turn in Labour’s political fortunes that began in 2020 with the ouster of then-Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who was widely perceived as indulgent of antisemitism in the party. Yet his government also faces political pressure from left-wing pro-Palestinian voters, not unlike the dilemmas that have hampered President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris during the U.S. presidential season.
“I fully supported the U.K.’s role in defending Israel when Iran launched its unprecedented attack, and I utterly condemn the Houthi attack on Tel Aviv overnight,” British Foreign Secretary David Lammy told the House of Commons last week. “There are also those who, like me, represent constituents who are convinced that the world does not understand the depth of Palestinian suffering. … I understand both those perspectives. I recognize the pain and anguish felt on all sides. It makes me only more determined to do all I can in this office to advance the cause of peace.”
Britain’s Labour Party Prime Minister Keir Starmer speaking upon being elected earlier in July. Starmer is “looking at” withdrawing a legal argument lodged by the U.K.’s previous leadership against the International Criminal Court prosecutor’s indictment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (AP)
Western attempts to balance those political and policy priorities have been complicated by ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan, who unveiled indictments of Hamas leaders paired with charges against Netanyahu and his defense minister, Yoav Gallant, in May. Khan accused the Israeli leaders of “intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population,” but Israeli officials maintain that the civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip are a consequence of Hamas’ tactics.
“Senior Hamas official Fathi Hamad … boasted that Palestinian women and children excel at being human shields,” Netanyahu said during his joint address to Congress, referring to a speech given by a Hamas leader in 2008. “They actually want Palestinian civilians to die, so that Israel will be smeared in the international media and be pressured to end the war before it’s won.”
Then-British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak denounced the indictment, in part on the grounds that “the ICC does not have jurisdiction” over Israel. His team urged the ICC’s pretrial chamber to reject Khan’s request for warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant, but Starmer’s government “is expected to drop the previous government’s objections,” according to the New York Times, which reported Starmer’s team might be “edging away from” the U.S. approach to the war.
“We reject the overall characterization in that piece,” the Starmer spokeswoman said. “The Government has been clear about Israel’s right to self-defense and its right to respond to a terror attack in line with international humanitarian law. We’ve been in lockstep with the US on this matter and also in our efforts with the US and other allies in terms of promoting regional stability.”
Biden rejected Khan’s allegations as “outrageous” in May, saying that “it’s clear Israel wants to do all it can to ensure civilian protection.” The jurisdictional dispute also has wider ramifications for other countries in disputes with the ICC.
“This is an own goal for Britain,” Foundation for Defense of Democracies senior adviser Richard Goldberg, the Trump White House National Security Council’s lead official for countering Iran’s nuclear program, told the Washington Examiner. “There’s no jurisdiction for the ICC to come after the British military let alone Israel, which is both a fellow democracy and a nonmember. Starmer may think he is appeasing a pro-Hamas base in Labour, but he’s actually putting American and British troops in the ICC crosshairs.”
Lammy said last week that the Starmer government’s response to the ICC and demands to halt arms sales to Israel will depend on the results of a “quasi-legal process” of consultations across the government. And he signaled that the government might change course, but not as much as some leftist supporters want.
“Israel is surrounded by people who would see its annihilation — it is being attacked by the Houthis, Hezbollah are firing missiles, and Hamas want to wipe it off the map,” he said. “For those reasons, it would not be right to have a blanket ban between our countries and Israel. What is right is for me to consider in the normal way the issues in relation to offensive weapons in Gaza, following the quasi-judicial process that I have outlined.”
, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is “looking at” withdrawing a legal argument lodged by the United Kingdom’s previous leadership against the International Criminal Court prosecutor’s indictment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his office acknowledged Thursday. “It is for the prosecutor and the court to make a decision,” a spokeswoman in Starmer’s office told British media. “Now, with regard to the previous government’s proposals around a submission, we are looking at that but I don’t have any further updates.” Starmer, a Labour Party leader, came to power just weeks ago following a landslide election that ended 14 years of Conservative Party rule. That victory marked the culmination of a turn in Labour’s political fortunes that began in 2020 with the ouster of then-Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who was widely perceived as indulgent of antisemitism in the party. Yet his government also faces political pressure from left-wing pro-Palestinian voters, not unlike the dilemmas that have hampered President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris during the U.S. presidential season. “I fully supported the U.K.’s role in defending Israel when Iran launched its unprecedented attack, and I utterly condemn the Houthi attack on Tel Aviv overnight,” British Foreign Secretary David Lammy told the House of Commons last week. “There are also those who, like me, represent constituents who are convinced that the world does not understand the depth of Palestinian suffering. … I understand both those perspectives. I recognize the pain and anguish felt on all sides. It makes me only more determined to do all I can in this office to advance the cause of peace.” Britain’s Labour Party Prime Minister Keir Starmer speaking upon being elected earlier in July. Starmer is “looking at” withdrawing a legal argument lodged by the U.K.’s previous leadership against the International Criminal Court prosecutor’s indictment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (AP) Western attempts to balance those political and policy priorities have been complicated by ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan, who unveiled indictments of Hamas leaders paired with charges against Netanyahu and his defense minister, Yoav Gallant, in May. Khan accused the Israeli leaders of “intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population,” but Israeli officials maintain that the civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip are a consequence of Hamas’ tactics. “Senior Hamas official Fathi Hamad … boasted that Palestinian women and children excel at being human shields,” Netanyahu said during his joint address to Congress, referring to a speech given by a Hamas leader in 2008. “They actually want Palestinian civilians to die, so that Israel will be smeared in the international media and be pressured to end the war before it’s won.” Then-British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak denounced the indictment, in part on the grounds that “the ICC does not have jurisdiction” over Israel. His team urged the ICC’s pretrial chamber to reject Khan’s request for warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant, but Starmer’s government “is expected to drop the previous government’s objections,” according to the New York Times, which reported Starmer’s team might be “edging away from” the U.S. approach to the war. “We reject the overall characterization in that piece,” the Starmer spokeswoman said. “The Government has been clear about Israel’s right to self-defense and its right to respond to a terror attack in line with international humanitarian law. We’ve been in lockstep with the US on this matter and also in our efforts with the US and other allies in terms of promoting regional stability.” Biden rejected Khan’s allegations as “outrageous” in May, saying that “it’s clear Israel wants to do all it can to ensure civilian protection.” The jurisdictional dispute also has wider ramifications for other countries in disputes with the ICC. “This is an own goal for Britain,” Foundation for Defense of Democracies senior adviser Richard Goldberg, the Trump White House National Security Council’s lead official for countering Iran’s nuclear program, told the Washington Examiner. “There’s no jurisdiction for the ICC to come after the British military let alone Israel, which is both a fellow democracy and a nonmember. Starmer may think he is appeasing a pro-Hamas base in Labour, but he’s actually putting American and British troops in the ICC crosshairs.” CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER Lammy said last week that the Starmer government’s response to the ICC and demands to halt arms sales to Israel will depend on the results of a “quasi-legal process” of consultations across the government. And he signaled that the government might change course, but not as much as some leftist supporters want. “Israel is surrounded by people who would see its annihilation — it is being attacked by the Houthis, Hezbollah are firing missiles, and Hamas want to wipe it off the map,” he said. “For those reasons, it would not be right to have a blanket ban between our countries and Israel. What is right is for me to consider in the normal way the issues in relation to offensive weapons in Gaza, following the quasi-judicial process that I have outlined.”, , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Kier-Starmer-ICC.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,
President Joe Biden’s sudden status as the isolated and outgoing commander in chief has thrown a wrench into Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s attempt to rally U.S. opposition to Iran and its proxies, as the embattled premier faces a cold shoulder from Democratic leaders amid pressure from his own security establishment.
“I think what we’re going to see is a prime minister of Israel that tries to shift the focus to … [the analysis that] Israel is at war with Iran,” Foundation for Defense of Democracies Senior Vice President Jonathan Schanzer told the Washington Examiner. “It is a multifront war that is now being waged across the Middle East — Lebanon, Gaza, West Bank, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Iran itself — all of these fronts have gone hot at different points over the last nine months, but they are all part of a much bigger picture that I believe has been lost on the American public.”
And yet, as he approached Washington, it wasn’t clear how much of Netanyahu’s agenda was achievable. Originally, Biden was scheduled to meet with Netanyahu on Tuesday, but the president’s sudden bout of COVID and the political mutiny that forced him to abandon his reelection bid threw those plans into disarray. At one point on Monday it looked like Netanyahu might not even have a face-to-face with Biden at all, but that now appears to be on the cards for Thursday.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a session of the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, in Jerusalem, Wednesday, July 17, 2024. (AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg)
Netanyahu’s team also heard indirectly from Biden, who previewed the remaining months of his presidency in a call with campaign staff.
“I’ll be working very closely with the Israelis and with the Palestinians to try to work out how we can get the Gaza war to end, and Middle East peace, and get all those hostages home,” Biden said Monday, in remarks aired for the public. “I think we’re on the verge of being able to do that.”
Vice President Kamala Harris, suddenly thrust into a presidential campaign with her as the top billing, is skipping Netanyahu’s joint address to Congress, although she did agree to meet with him in private.
“She will reiterate her deep concerns about the humanitarian situation in Gaza and the loss of innocent life,” an aide to Harris said Monday. “We anticipate the Vice President will convey her view that it is time for the war to end in a way where Israel is secure, all hostages are released, the suffering of Palestinian civilians in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can enjoy their right to dignity, freedom, and self-determination. And they will discuss efforts to reach agreement on the ceasefire deal.”
After a bit of searching, Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Ben Cardin, who is not seeking reelection, emerged as the Senate Democrat who would preside over the address. Furthermore, the arriving prime minister was not met by any cabinet-level dignitaries when he landed at Joint Base Andrews. On scale, it was a frosty reception that threatens to diminish the effect of the pageantry that Netanyahu has hoped to enjoy.
Biden’s message touches on several issues that have undermined Netanyahu’s standing at home and abroad, in the 10th month of a grinding war for the “destruction of Hamas” and the release of the hostages seized by the terrorist group during their rampage across southern Israel on Oct. 7. The civilian casualties and humanitarian crisis in Gaza led to an uproar in the United States and across the American alliance network. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has emphasized that Hamas is “using civilians as human shields,” but congressional leaders had to scramble to find a Senate Democrat willing to sit behind Netanyahu during his address. Senate President Pro Tempore Patty Murray (D-WA) also refused to play the part.
“He’s beleaguered by the Israeli left and even to some extent, the Israeli center and the challenges to his rule,” Schanzer said. “So this is [intended] to be his opportunity to counter all of that and demonstrate that he is a statesman, that he is a world leader, that he is still very much welcomed. That’s the message that he’s going to deliver at home.”
If it all goes well enough, it could help Netanyahu to fortify his position among Israeli voters angered by his government’s failures in the lead-up to the Oct. 7 terrorist attack that ignited the war and suspicious that the hard-right wing of Netanyahu’s coalition has deterred the prime minister from striking a ceasefire deal to secure the release of the hostages. And it could present an opportunity for U.S. and Israeli officials to have working-level discussions about the trajectory of the two governments’ strategies in the region, at a potential inflection point in the conflict.
“What really needs to be ironed out is that, you know, Israel is keen to kind of finish the job in Gaza, because they feel the need to quickly pivot to probably a new war with Hezbollah,” Dr. Sara Yael Hirschhorn, historian at the University of Haifa, told the Washington Examiner. “I don’t think that Israel can afford to not confront Iran or any of its allies. And the United States doesn’t want to get involved there.”
Their disagreements extend beyond the question of how to respond to Lebanese Hezbollah, whose rocket and artillery fire has forced the evacuation of northern Israel. Netanyahu hinted at the deeper divergence in the hours after Israeli forces retaliated against the Iran-backed Houthis who launched a suicide drone attack on Tel Aviv, killing one person.
“I would like to thank the United States, Britain, France, and other members of the international maritime coalition that was formed to repel Houthi attacks,” Netanyahu said Saturday. “But the drone attack that struck Israel in the early morning hours yesterday shows that more than defensive action is needed to curtail the Houthis. Offensive action is also needed. It’s needed to ensure that Iran’s terror proxies pay a price for their brazen aggression.”
At home, however, Netanyahu faces a problem that has bedeviled Biden in recent weeks — the maneuvering of (former) allies who leak their effort to press him to change course. As Netanyahu prepared to visit the U.S., the leaders of the Jewish state’s national security apparatus pushed him to strike a deal with Hamas to secure the release of hostages — even if it involves a withdrawal of Israel Defense Forces from the Gaza Strip.
“We will know how to create all the flexibility needed to honor the terms of the deal,” IDF chief of staff Herzi Halevi told Netanyahu during a Sunday meeting. “This is the time to combine the military pressure and the negotiations and see how to move forward.”
That leak added security-minded reinforcements to the families of the hostages, who renewed their demand for a hostage deal on Monday.
“We fully expect that his speech to Congress on Wednesday is going to be the announcement of this hostage deal that we’ve all been waiting for,” Jon Polin — whose son, Hersh Goldberg Polin, is one of several Israeli-Americans held by Hamas — told Haaretz. “We view any speech that is not the announcement to be a total failure.”
2024-07-23 13:16:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fnews%2F3095126%2Fmultifront-war-netanyahu-faces-chaos-in-us-anger-in-israel-and-threats-from-iran%2F?w=600&h=450, President Joe Biden’s sudden status as the isolated and outgoing commander in chief has thrown a wrench into Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s attempt to rally U.S. opposition to Iran and its proxies, as the embattled premier faces a cold shoulder from Democratic leaders amid pressure from his own security establishment. “I think what we’re,
President Joe Biden’s sudden status as the isolated and outgoing commander in chief has thrown a wrench into Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s attempt to rally U.S. opposition to Iran and its proxies, as the embattled premier faces a cold shoulder from Democratic leaders amid pressure from his own security establishment.
“I think what we’re going to see is a prime minister of Israel that tries to shift the focus to … [the analysis that] Israel is at war with Iran,” Foundation for Defense of Democracies Senior Vice President Jonathan Schanzer told the Washington Examiner. “It is a multifront war that is now being waged across the Middle East — Lebanon, Gaza, West Bank, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Iran itself — all of these fronts have gone hot at different points over the last nine months, but they are all part of a much bigger picture that I believe has been lost on the American public.”
And yet, as he approached Washington, it wasn’t clear how much of Netanyahu’s agenda was achievable. Originally, Biden was scheduled to meet with Netanyahu on Tuesday, but the president’s sudden bout of COVID and the political mutiny that forced him to abandon his reelection bid threw those plans into disarray. At one point on Monday it looked like Netanyahu might not even have a face-to-face with Biden at all, but that now appears to be on the cards for Thursday.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a session of the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, in Jerusalem, Wednesday, July 17, 2024. (AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg)
Netanyahu’s team also heard indirectly from Biden, who previewed the remaining months of his presidency in a call with campaign staff.
“I’ll be working very closely with the Israelis and with the Palestinians to try to work out how we can get the Gaza war to end, and Middle East peace, and get all those hostages home,” Biden said Monday, in remarks aired for the public. “I think we’re on the verge of being able to do that.”
Vice President Kamala Harris, suddenly thrust into a presidential campaign with her as the top billing, is skipping Netanyahu’s joint address to Congress, although she did agree to meet with him in private.
“She will reiterate her deep concerns about the humanitarian situation in Gaza and the loss of innocent life,” an aide to Harris said Monday. “We anticipate the Vice President will convey her view that it is time for the war to end in a way where Israel is secure, all hostages are released, the suffering of Palestinian civilians in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can enjoy their right to dignity, freedom, and self-determination. And they will discuss efforts to reach agreement on the ceasefire deal.”
After a bit of searching, Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Ben Cardin, who is not seeking reelection, emerged as the Senate Democrat who would preside over the address. Furthermore, the arriving prime minister was not met by any cabinet-level dignitaries when he landed at Joint Base Andrews. On scale, it was a frosty reception that threatens to diminish the effect of the pageantry that Netanyahu has hoped to enjoy.
Biden’s message touches on several issues that have undermined Netanyahu’s standing at home and abroad, in the 10th month of a grinding war for the “destruction of Hamas” and the release of the hostages seized by the terrorist group during their rampage across southern Israel on Oct. 7. The civilian casualties and humanitarian crisis in Gaza led to an uproar in the United States and across the American alliance network. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has emphasized that Hamas is “using civilians as human shields,” but congressional leaders had to scramble to find a Senate Democrat willing to sit behind Netanyahu during his address. Senate President Pro Tempore Patty Murray (D-WA) also refused to play the part.
“He’s beleaguered by the Israeli left and even to some extent, the Israeli center and the challenges to his rule,” Schanzer said. “So this is [intended] to be his opportunity to counter all of that and demonstrate that he is a statesman, that he is a world leader, that he is still very much welcomed. That’s the message that he’s going to deliver at home.”
If it all goes well enough, it could help Netanyahu to fortify his position among Israeli voters angered by his government’s failures in the lead-up to the Oct. 7 terrorist attack that ignited the war and suspicious that the hard-right wing of Netanyahu’s coalition has deterred the prime minister from striking a ceasefire deal to secure the release of the hostages. And it could present an opportunity for U.S. and Israeli officials to have working-level discussions about the trajectory of the two governments’ strategies in the region, at a potential inflection point in the conflict.
“What really needs to be ironed out is that, you know, Israel is keen to kind of finish the job in Gaza, because they feel the need to quickly pivot to probably a new war with Hezbollah,” Dr. Sara Yael Hirschhorn, historian at the University of Haifa, told the Washington Examiner. “I don’t think that Israel can afford to not confront Iran or any of its allies. And the United States doesn’t want to get involved there.”
Their disagreements extend beyond the question of how to respond to Lebanese Hezbollah, whose rocket and artillery fire has forced the evacuation of northern Israel. Netanyahu hinted at the deeper divergence in the hours after Israeli forces retaliated against the Iran-backed Houthis who launched a suicide drone attack on Tel Aviv, killing one person.
“I would like to thank the United States, Britain, France, and other members of the international maritime coalition that was formed to repel Houthi attacks,” Netanyahu said Saturday. “But the drone attack that struck Israel in the early morning hours yesterday shows that more than defensive action is needed to curtail the Houthis. Offensive action is also needed. It’s needed to ensure that Iran’s terror proxies pay a price for their brazen aggression.”
At home, however, Netanyahu faces a problem that has bedeviled Biden in recent weeks — the maneuvering of (former) allies who leak their effort to press him to change course. As Netanyahu prepared to visit the U.S., the leaders of the Jewish state’s national security apparatus pushed him to strike a deal with Hamas to secure the release of hostages — even if it involves a withdrawal of Israel Defense Forces from the Gaza Strip.
“We will know how to create all the flexibility needed to honor the terms of the deal,” IDF chief of staff Herzi Halevi told Netanyahu during a Sunday meeting. “This is the time to combine the military pressure and the negotiations and see how to move forward.”
That leak added security-minded reinforcements to the families of the hostages, who renewed their demand for a hostage deal on Monday.
“We fully expect that his speech to Congress on Wednesday is going to be the announcement of this hostage deal that we’ve all been waiting for,” Jon Polin — whose son, Hersh Goldberg Polin, is one of several Israeli-Americans held by Hamas — told Haaretz. “We view any speech that is not the announcement to be a total failure.”
, President Joe Biden’s sudden status as the isolated and outgoing commander in chief has thrown a wrench into Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s attempt to rally U.S. opposition to Iran and its proxies, as the embattled premier faces a cold shoulder from Democratic leaders amid pressure from his own security establishment. “I think what we’re going to see is a prime minister of Israel that tries to shift the focus to … [the analysis that] Israel is at war with Iran,” Foundation for Defense of Democracies Senior Vice President Jonathan Schanzer told the Washington Examiner. “It is a multifront war that is now being waged across the Middle East — Lebanon, Gaza, West Bank, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Iran itself — all of these fronts have gone hot at different points over the last nine months, but they are all part of a much bigger picture that I believe has been lost on the American public.” And yet, as he approached Washington, it wasn’t clear how much of Netanyahu’s agenda was achievable. Originally, Biden was scheduled to meet with Netanyahu on Tuesday, but the president’s sudden bout of COVID and the political mutiny that forced him to abandon his reelection bid threw those plans into disarray. At one point on Monday it looked like Netanyahu might not even have a face-to-face with Biden at all, but that now appears to be on the cards for Thursday. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a session of the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, in Jerusalem, Wednesday, July 17, 2024. (AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg) Netanyahu’s team also heard indirectly from Biden, who previewed the remaining months of his presidency in a call with campaign staff. “I’ll be working very closely with the Israelis and with the Palestinians to try to work out how we can get the Gaza war to end, and Middle East peace, and get all those hostages home,” Biden said Monday, in remarks aired for the public. “I think we’re on the verge of being able to do that.” Vice President Kamala Harris, suddenly thrust into a presidential campaign with her as the top billing, is skipping Netanyahu’s joint address to Congress, although she did agree to meet with him in private. “She will reiterate her deep concerns about the humanitarian situation in Gaza and the loss of innocent life,” an aide to Harris said Monday. “We anticipate the Vice President will convey her view that it is time for the war to end in a way where Israel is secure, all hostages are released, the suffering of Palestinian civilians in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can enjoy their right to dignity, freedom, and self-determination. And they will discuss efforts to reach agreement on the ceasefire deal.” After a bit of searching, Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Ben Cardin, who is not seeking reelection, emerged as the Senate Democrat who would preside over the address. Furthermore, the arriving prime minister was not met by any cabinet-level dignitaries when he landed at Joint Base Andrews. On scale, it was a frosty reception that threatens to diminish the effect of the pageantry that Netanyahu has hoped to enjoy. Biden’s message touches on several issues that have undermined Netanyahu’s standing at home and abroad, in the 10th month of a grinding war for the “destruction of Hamas” and the release of the hostages seized by the terrorist group during their rampage across southern Israel on Oct. 7. The civilian casualties and humanitarian crisis in Gaza led to an uproar in the United States and across the American alliance network. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has emphasized that Hamas is “using civilians as human shields,” but congressional leaders had to scramble to find a Senate Democrat willing to sit behind Netanyahu during his address. Senate President Pro Tempore Patty Murray (D-WA) also refused to play the part. “He’s beleaguered by the Israeli left and even to some extent, the Israeli center and the challenges to his rule,” Schanzer said. “So this is [intended] to be his opportunity to counter all of that and demonstrate that he is a statesman, that he is a world leader, that he is still very much welcomed. That’s the message that he’s going to deliver at home.” If it all goes well enough, it could help Netanyahu to fortify his position among Israeli voters angered by his government’s failures in the lead-up to the Oct. 7 terrorist attack that ignited the war and suspicious that the hard-right wing of Netanyahu’s coalition has deterred the prime minister from striking a ceasefire deal to secure the release of the hostages. And it could present an opportunity for U.S. and Israeli officials to have working-level discussions about the trajectory of the two governments’ strategies in the region, at a potential inflection point in the conflict. “What really needs to be ironed out is that, you know, Israel is keen to kind of finish the job in Gaza, because they feel the need to quickly pivot to probably a new war with Hezbollah,” Dr. Sara Yael Hirschhorn, historian at the University of Haifa, told the Washington Examiner. “I don’t think that Israel can afford to not confront Iran or any of its allies. And the United States doesn’t want to get involved there.” Their disagreements extend beyond the question of how to respond to Lebanese Hezbollah, whose rocket and artillery fire has forced the evacuation of northern Israel. Netanyahu hinted at the deeper divergence in the hours after Israeli forces retaliated against the Iran-backed Houthis who launched a suicide drone attack on Tel Aviv, killing one person. “I would like to thank the United States, Britain, France, and other members of the international maritime coalition that was formed to repel Houthi attacks,” Netanyahu said Saturday. “But the drone attack that struck Israel in the early morning hours yesterday shows that more than defensive action is needed to curtail the Houthis. Offensive action is also needed. It’s needed to ensure that Iran’s terror proxies pay a price for their brazen aggression.” At home, however, Netanyahu faces a problem that has bedeviled Biden in recent weeks — the maneuvering of (former) allies who leak their effort to press him to change course. As Netanyahu prepared to visit the U.S., the leaders of the Jewish state’s national security apparatus pushed him to strike a deal with Hamas to secure the release of hostages — even if it involves a withdrawal of Israel Defense Forces from the Gaza Strip. “We will know how to create all the flexibility needed to honor the terms of the deal,” IDF chief of staff Herzi Halevi told Netanyahu during a Sunday meeting. “This is the time to combine the military pressure and the negotiations and see how to move forward.” CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER That leak added security-minded reinforcements to the families of the hostages, who renewed their demand for a hostage deal on Monday. “We fully expect that his speech to Congress on Wednesday is going to be the announcement of this hostage deal that we’ve all been waiting for,” Jon Polin — whose son, Hersh Goldberg Polin, is one of several Israeli-Americans held by Hamas — told Haaretz. “We view any speech that is not the announcement to be a total failure.”, , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/netanyahu-1.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,
President Joe Biden’s sudden status as the isolated and outgoing commander in chief has thrown a wrench into Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s attempt to rally U.S. opposition to Iran and its proxies, as the embattled premier faces a cold shoulder from Democratic leaders amid pressure from his own security establishment.
“I think what we’re going to see is a prime minister of Israel that tries to shift the focus to … [the analysis that] Israel is at war with Iran,” Foundation for Defense of Democracies Senior Vice President Jonathan Schanzer told the Washington Examiner. “It is a multifront war that is now being waged across the Middle East — Lebanon, Gaza, West Bank, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Iran itself — all of these fronts have gone hot at different points over the last nine months, but they are all part of a much bigger picture that I believe has been lost on the American public.”
And yet, as he approached Washington, it wasn’t clear how much of Netanyahu’s agenda was achievable. Biden, still recovering from COVID and the political mutiny that forced him to abandon his reelection bid, couldn’t confirm that he would meet Netanyahu after all and Vice President Kamala Harris decided to hit the campaign trail during his speech, although she did agree to meet with him in private.
“She will reiterate her deep concerns about the humanitarian situation in Gaza and the loss of innocent life,” an aide to Harris said Monday. “We anticipate the Vice President will convey her view that it is time for the war to end in a way where Israel is secure, all hostages are released, the suffering of Palestinian civilians in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can enjoy their right to dignity, freedom, and self-determination. And they will discuss efforts to reach agreement on the ceasefire deal.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a session of the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, in Jerusalem, Wednesday, July 17, 2024. (AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg)
Netanyahu’s team also heard indirectly from Biden, who previewed the remaining months of his presidency in a call with campaign staff.
“I’ll be working very closely with the Israelis and with the Palestinians to try to work out how we can get the Gaza war to end, and Middle East peace, and get all those hostages home,” Biden said Monday, in remarks aired for the public. “I think we’re on the verge of being able to do that.”
Yet Biden’s message touches on several issues that have undermined Netanyahu’s standing at home and abroad, in the 10th month of a grinding war for the “destruction of Hamas” and the release of the hostages seized by the terrorist group during their rampage across southern Israel on Oct. 7. The civilian casualties and humanitarian crisis in Gaza led to an uproar in the United States and across the American alliance network. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has emphasized that Hamas is “using civilians as human shields,” but congressional leaders had to scramble to find a Senate Democrat willing to sit behind Netanyahu during his address. Senate President Pro Tempore Patty Murray (D-WA) also refused to play the part.
After a bit of searching, Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Ben Cardin, who is not seeking reelection, emerged as the Senate Democrat who would preside over the address. Furthermore, the arriving prime minister was not met by any cabinet-level dignitaries when he landed at Joint Base Andrews. On scale, it was a frosty reception that threatens to diminish the effect of the pageantry that Netanyahu has hoped to enjoy.
“He’s beleaguered by the Israeli left and even to some extent, the Israeli center and the challenges to his rule,” Schanzer said. “So this is [intended] to be his opportunity to counter all of that and demonstrate that he is a statesman, that he is a world leader, that he is still very much welcomed. That’s the message that he’s going to deliver at home.”
If it all goes well enough, it could help Netanyahu to fortify his position among Israeli voters angered by his government’s failures in the lead-up to the Oct. 7 terrorist attack that ignited the war and suspicious that the hard-right wing of Netanyahu’s coalition has deterred the prime minister from striking a ceasefire deal to secure the release of the hostages. And it could present an opportunity for U.S. and Israeli officials to have working-level discussions about the trajectory of the two governments’ strategies in the region, at a potential inflection point in the conflict.
“What really needs to be ironed out is that, you know, Israel is keen to kind of finish the job in Gaza, because they feel the need to quickly pivot to probably a new war with Hezbollah,” Dr. Sara Yael Hirschhorn, historian at the University of Haifa, told the Washington Examiner. “I don’t think that Israel can afford to not confront Iran or any of its allies. And the United States doesn’t want to get involved there.”
Their disagreements extend beyond the question of how to respond to Lebanese Hezbollah, whose rocket and artillery fire has forced the evacuation of northern Israel. Netanyahu hinted at the deeper divergence in the hours after Israeli forces retaliated against the Iran-backed Houthis who launched a suicide drone attack on Tel Aviv, killing one person.
“I would like to thank the United States, Britain, France, and other members of the international maritime coalition that was formed to repel Houthi attacks,” Netanyahu said Saturday. “But the drone attack that struck Israel in the early morning hours yesterday shows that more than defensive action is needed to curtail the Houthis. Offensive action is also needed. It’s needed to ensure that Iran’s terror proxies pay a price for their brazen aggression.”
At home, however, Netanyahu faces a problem that has bedeviled Biden in recent weeks — the maneuvering of (former) allies who leak their effort to press him to change course. As Netanyahu prepared to visit the U.S., the leaders of the Jewish state’s national security apparatus pushed him to strike a deal with Hamas to secure the release of hostages — even if it involves a withdrawal of Israel Defense Forces from the Gaza Strip.
“We will know how to create all the flexibility needed to honor the terms of the deal,” IDF chief of staff Herzi Halevi told Netanyahu during a Sunday meeting. “This is the time to combine the military pressure and the negotiations and see how to move forward.”
That leak added security-minded reinforcements to the families of the hostages, who renewed their demand for a hostage deal on Monday.
“We fully expect that his speech to Congress on Wednesday is going to be the announcement of this hostage deal that we’ve all been waiting for,” Jon Polin — whose son, Hersh Goldberg Polin, is one of several Israeli-Americans held by Hamas — told Haaretz. “We view any speech that is not the announcement to be a total failure.”
2024-07-23 01:08:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fnews%2F3095126%2Fmultifront-war-netanyahu-faces-chaos-in-us-anger-in-israel-and-threats-from-iran%2F?w=600&h=450, President Joe Biden’s sudden status as the isolated and outgoing commander in chief has thrown a wrench into Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s attempt to rally U.S. opposition to Iran and its proxies, as the embattled premier faces a cold shoulder from Democratic leaders amid pressure from his own security establishment. “I think what we’re,
President Joe Biden’s sudden status as the isolated and outgoing commander in chief has thrown a wrench into Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s attempt to rally U.S. opposition to Iran and its proxies, as the embattled premier faces a cold shoulder from Democratic leaders amid pressure from his own security establishment.
“I think what we’re going to see is a prime minister of Israel that tries to shift the focus to … [the analysis that] Israel is at war with Iran,” Foundation for Defense of Democracies Senior Vice President Jonathan Schanzer told the Washington Examiner. “It is a multifront war that is now being waged across the Middle East — Lebanon, Gaza, West Bank, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Iran itself — all of these fronts have gone hot at different points over the last nine months, but they are all part of a much bigger picture that I believe has been lost on the American public.”
And yet, as he approached Washington, it wasn’t clear how much of Netanyahu’s agenda was achievable. Biden, still recovering from COVID and the political mutiny that forced him to abandon his reelection bid, couldn’t confirm that he would meet Netanyahu after all and Vice President Kamala Harris decided to hit the campaign trail during his speech, although she did agree to meet with him in private.
“She will reiterate her deep concerns about the humanitarian situation in Gaza and the loss of innocent life,” an aide to Harris said Monday. “We anticipate the Vice President will convey her view that it is time for the war to end in a way where Israel is secure, all hostages are released, the suffering of Palestinian civilians in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can enjoy their right to dignity, freedom, and self-determination. And they will discuss efforts to reach agreement on the ceasefire deal.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a session of the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, in Jerusalem, Wednesday, July 17, 2024. (AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg)
Netanyahu’s team also heard indirectly from Biden, who previewed the remaining months of his presidency in a call with campaign staff.
“I’ll be working very closely with the Israelis and with the Palestinians to try to work out how we can get the Gaza war to end, and Middle East peace, and get all those hostages home,” Biden said Monday, in remarks aired for the public. “I think we’re on the verge of being able to do that.”
Yet Biden’s message touches on several issues that have undermined Netanyahu’s standing at home and abroad, in the 10th month of a grinding war for the “destruction of Hamas” and the release of the hostages seized by the terrorist group during their rampage across southern Israel on Oct. 7. The civilian casualties and humanitarian crisis in Gaza led to an uproar in the United States and across the American alliance network. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has emphasized that Hamas is “using civilians as human shields,” but congressional leaders had to scramble to find a Senate Democrat willing to sit behind Netanyahu during his address. Senate President Pro Tempore Patty Murray (D-WA) also refused to play the part.
After a bit of searching, Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Ben Cardin, who is not seeking reelection, emerged as the Senate Democrat who would preside over the address. Furthermore, the arriving prime minister was not met by any cabinet-level dignitaries when he landed at Joint Base Andrews. On scale, it was a frosty reception that threatens to diminish the effect of the pageantry that Netanyahu has hoped to enjoy.
“He’s beleaguered by the Israeli left and even to some extent, the Israeli center and the challenges to his rule,” Schanzer said. “So this is [intended] to be his opportunity to counter all of that and demonstrate that he is a statesman, that he is a world leader, that he is still very much welcomed. That’s the message that he’s going to deliver at home.”
If it all goes well enough, it could help Netanyahu to fortify his position among Israeli voters angered by his government’s failures in the lead-up to the Oct. 7 terrorist attack that ignited the war and suspicious that the hard-right wing of Netanyahu’s coalition has deterred the prime minister from striking a ceasefire deal to secure the release of the hostages. And it could present an opportunity for U.S. and Israeli officials to have working-level discussions about the trajectory of the two governments’ strategies in the region, at a potential inflection point in the conflict.
“What really needs to be ironed out is that, you know, Israel is keen to kind of finish the job in Gaza, because they feel the need to quickly pivot to probably a new war with Hezbollah,” Dr. Sara Yael Hirschhorn, historian at the University of Haifa, told the Washington Examiner. “I don’t think that Israel can afford to not confront Iran or any of its allies. And the United States doesn’t want to get involved there.”
Their disagreements extend beyond the question of how to respond to Lebanese Hezbollah, whose rocket and artillery fire has forced the evacuation of northern Israel. Netanyahu hinted at the deeper divergence in the hours after Israeli forces retaliated against the Iran-backed Houthis who launched a suicide drone attack on Tel Aviv, killing one person.
“I would like to thank the United States, Britain, France, and other members of the international maritime coalition that was formed to repel Houthi attacks,” Netanyahu said Saturday. “But the drone attack that struck Israel in the early morning hours yesterday shows that more than defensive action is needed to curtail the Houthis. Offensive action is also needed. It’s needed to ensure that Iran’s terror proxies pay a price for their brazen aggression.”
At home, however, Netanyahu faces a problem that has bedeviled Biden in recent weeks — the maneuvering of (former) allies who leak their effort to press him to change course. As Netanyahu prepared to visit the U.S., the leaders of the Jewish state’s national security apparatus pushed him to strike a deal with Hamas to secure the release of hostages — even if it involves a withdrawal of Israel Defense Forces from the Gaza Strip.
“We will know how to create all the flexibility needed to honor the terms of the deal,” IDF chief of staff Herzi Halevi told Netanyahu during a Sunday meeting. “This is the time to combine the military pressure and the negotiations and see how to move forward.”
That leak added security-minded reinforcements to the families of the hostages, who renewed their demand for a hostage deal on Monday.
“We fully expect that his speech to Congress on Wednesday is going to be the announcement of this hostage deal that we’ve all been waiting for,” Jon Polin — whose son, Hersh Goldberg Polin, is one of several Israeli-Americans held by Hamas — told Haaretz. “We view any speech that is not the announcement to be a total failure.”
, President Joe Biden’s sudden status as the isolated and outgoing commander in chief has thrown a wrench into Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s attempt to rally U.S. opposition to Iran and its proxies, as the embattled premier faces a cold shoulder from Democratic leaders amid pressure from his own security establishment. “I think what we’re going to see is a prime minister of Israel that tries to shift the focus to … [the analysis that] Israel is at war with Iran,” Foundation for Defense of Democracies Senior Vice President Jonathan Schanzer told the Washington Examiner. “It is a multifront war that is now being waged across the Middle East — Lebanon, Gaza, West Bank, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Iran itself — all of these fronts have gone hot at different points over the last nine months, but they are all part of a much bigger picture that I believe has been lost on the American public.” And yet, as he approached Washington, it wasn’t clear how much of Netanyahu’s agenda was achievable. Biden, still recovering from COVID and the political mutiny that forced him to abandon his reelection bid, couldn’t confirm that he would meet Netanyahu after all and Vice President Kamala Harris decided to hit the campaign trail during his speech, although she did agree to meet with him in private. “She will reiterate her deep concerns about the humanitarian situation in Gaza and the loss of innocent life,” an aide to Harris said Monday. “We anticipate the Vice President will convey her view that it is time for the war to end in a way where Israel is secure, all hostages are released, the suffering of Palestinian civilians in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can enjoy their right to dignity, freedom, and self-determination. And they will discuss efforts to reach agreement on the ceasefire deal.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a session of the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, in Jerusalem, Wednesday, July 17, 2024. (AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg) Netanyahu’s team also heard indirectly from Biden, who previewed the remaining months of his presidency in a call with campaign staff. “I’ll be working very closely with the Israelis and with the Palestinians to try to work out how we can get the Gaza war to end, and Middle East peace, and get all those hostages home,” Biden said Monday, in remarks aired for the public. “I think we’re on the verge of being able to do that.” Yet Biden’s message touches on several issues that have undermined Netanyahu’s standing at home and abroad, in the 10th month of a grinding war for the “destruction of Hamas” and the release of the hostages seized by the terrorist group during their rampage across southern Israel on Oct. 7. The civilian casualties and humanitarian crisis in Gaza led to an uproar in the United States and across the American alliance network. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has emphasized that Hamas is “using civilians as human shields,” but congressional leaders had to scramble to find a Senate Democrat willing to sit behind Netanyahu during his address. Senate President Pro Tempore Patty Murray (D-WA) also refused to play the part. After a bit of searching, Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Ben Cardin, who is not seeking reelection, emerged as the Senate Democrat who would preside over the address. Furthermore, the arriving prime minister was not met by any cabinet-level dignitaries when he landed at Joint Base Andrews. On scale, it was a frosty reception that threatens to diminish the effect of the pageantry that Netanyahu has hoped to enjoy. “He’s beleaguered by the Israeli left and even to some extent, the Israeli center and the challenges to his rule,” Schanzer said. “So this is [intended] to be his opportunity to counter all of that and demonstrate that he is a statesman, that he is a world leader, that he is still very much welcomed. That’s the message that he’s going to deliver at home.” If it all goes well enough, it could help Netanyahu to fortify his position among Israeli voters angered by his government’s failures in the lead-up to the Oct. 7 terrorist attack that ignited the war and suspicious that the hard-right wing of Netanyahu’s coalition has deterred the prime minister from striking a ceasefire deal to secure the release of the hostages. And it could present an opportunity for U.S. and Israeli officials to have working-level discussions about the trajectory of the two governments’ strategies in the region, at a potential inflection point in the conflict. “What really needs to be ironed out is that, you know, Israel is keen to kind of finish the job in Gaza, because they feel the need to quickly pivot to probably a new war with Hezbollah,” Dr. Sara Yael Hirschhorn, historian at the University of Haifa, told the Washington Examiner. “I don’t think that Israel can afford to not confront Iran or any of its allies. And the United States doesn’t want to get involved there.” Their disagreements extend beyond the question of how to respond to Lebanese Hezbollah, whose rocket and artillery fire has forced the evacuation of northern Israel. Netanyahu hinted at the deeper divergence in the hours after Israeli forces retaliated against the Iran-backed Houthis who launched a suicide drone attack on Tel Aviv, killing one person. “I would like to thank the United States, Britain, France, and other members of the international maritime coalition that was formed to repel Houthi attacks,” Netanyahu said Saturday. “But the drone attack that struck Israel in the early morning hours yesterday shows that more than defensive action is needed to curtail the Houthis. Offensive action is also needed. It’s needed to ensure that Iran’s terror proxies pay a price for their brazen aggression.” At home, however, Netanyahu faces a problem that has bedeviled Biden in recent weeks — the maneuvering of (former) allies who leak their effort to press him to change course. As Netanyahu prepared to visit the U.S., the leaders of the Jewish state’s national security apparatus pushed him to strike a deal with Hamas to secure the release of hostages — even if it involves a withdrawal of Israel Defense Forces from the Gaza Strip. “We will know how to create all the flexibility needed to honor the terms of the deal,” IDF chief of staff Herzi Halevi told Netanyahu during a Sunday meeting. “This is the time to combine the military pressure and the negotiations and see how to move forward.” CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER That leak added security-minded reinforcements to the families of the hostages, who renewed their demand for a hostage deal on Monday. “We fully expect that his speech to Congress on Wednesday is going to be the announcement of this hostage deal that we’ve all been waiting for,” Jon Polin — whose son, Hersh Goldberg Polin, is one of several Israeli-Americans held by Hamas — told Haaretz. “We view any speech that is not the announcement to be a total failure.”, , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/netanyahu-1.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Joel Gehrke,
Former President Donald Trump’s complaints about Taiwan’s relationship with the United States has startled leaders in Taipei, where officials are hastening to counter his criticisms ahead of a potential return to the White House
“Taiwan has steadily strengthened its defense budget and demonstrated its responsibility to the international community,” Taiwanese Premier Cho Jung-tai told reporters. “We are willing to take on more responsibility; we are defending ourselves and ensuring our security.”
Taiwan has emerged as a dangerous hot spot in recent years, as the progress of China’s military modernization project is giving teeth to Beijing’s to bring the island democracy under the communist regime’s control. President Joe Biden has stated repeatedly that the United States would intervene on behalf of Taiwan if China were to launch an invasion, but Trump has struck a more detached posture in recent days.
“I think Taiwan should pay us for defense,” Trump toldBloomberg in an interview published this week. “You know, we’re no different than an insurance company. Taiwan doesn’t give us anything.”
Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump arrives at the Republican National Convention on Wednesday, July 17, 2024, in Milwaukee. (AP Photo/Paul Sancya)
Those remarks suggest that Taiwan will not be exempt from the Republican standard-bearer’s general perception that the United States suffers military expenses and economic costs through relations with many countries across the U.S. alliance network. American strategists have valued a strong relationship with Taiwan for decades, given the strategic value of the island’s location in a chain of U.S. and allied military bases in the Pacific — and Taiwanese officials have been an enthusiastic customer for the U.S. defense industry, as some Republican lawmakers noted in response to Trump.
“Taiwan is a perfect example of what we want all our allies to do,” House Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul (R-TX) told FocusTaiwan on Wednesday. “They have consistently been one of the biggest buyers of U.S. weapons for its defense.”
The geographical value of Taiwan compounded in recent decades by the development of the Taiwanese semiconductor microchip industry into a titan in the global economy, to Trump’s chagrin.
“I wouldn’t feel so secure right now, if I was them, but remember this: Taiwan took our chip business from us, I mean, how stupid are we?” he said. “They took all of our chip business. They’re immensely wealthy. And I don’t think we’re any different from an insurance policy. Why? Why are we doing this?”
Those skeptical questions could portend more turbulence in U.S.-Taiwan relations if Trump returns to power than Taiwanese authorities might have expected given their experience during his presidency. As president-elect, Trump had a phone call with the Taiwanese president — irritating Beijing, which claims sovereignty over the island and insists that foreign governments should not treat authorities in Taipei like leaders of a country. In the final days of his presidency, the State Department announced a lifting of restrictions on official contacts between the two governments.
In between those gestures, Trump’s national security team worked to orchestrate the construction of a Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company factory in Arizona — a deal widely perceived as a “win for Trump” and a victory for U.S. efforts to secure a reliable source of the most advanced microchips. But Trump called the value of those deals into question in his latest remarks.
“They took almost 100% of our chip industry, I give them credit,” he said. “Now we’re giving them billions of dollars to build new chips in our country, and then they’re going to take that too; in other words, they’ll build it but then they’ll bring it back to their country.”
Western allies will have to grapple with a “very big Russia problem” regardless of how the war in Ukraine ends, according to NATO’s top general in Europe, who underscored eastern European fears that Russia threatens “the survival of their states.”
“The outcome on the ground in Ukraine is terribly, terribly important — vital to future European and global security,” U.S. Army Gen. Christopher Cavoli, the NATO supreme allied commander Europe, told the Aspen Security Forum on Thursday. “So supporting Ukraine is vital for our security. But we can’t be under any illusions: at the end of a conflict in Ukraine, however, it concludes, we are going to have a very big Russia problem.”
Those remarks suggest Russia will pose a substantial threat to NATO for years to come, an assessment that would put pressure on the United States and its European allies to fortify against the prospect of Russian President Vladimir Putin or his successors rehabilitating their military forces after the current round of fighting halts. His remarks elaborated on a senior Estonian official’s argument that the stakes of war in Ukraine are “existential” for his country and their NATO neighbors.
“What people need to understand is that our house is on fire in Europe. War in Ukraine is existential,” Jonatan Vseviov, the secretary-general of the Estonian foreign ministry, told the Aspen audience during a panel discussion with Cavoli. “It’s existential, not because of geographic proximity, or even because of Putin having not changed any of his original goals — which are not limited to Ukraine only, [but include] the fundamental reshaping of the European security order and creating a buffer zone on his borders, which would include my country.”
U.S. Army Gen. Christopher Cavoli, supreme allied commander Europe, addresses a media conference at NATO headquarters in Brussels, Thursday, Jan. 18, 2024. (AP Photo/Virginia Mayo)
That fire burned hotter through the winter and spring months as Russian forces bombarded Ukrainian military and civilian infrastructure while Ukrainian troops labored under a shortage of air defense systems and ammunition. The passage of long-delayed legislation to authorize the shipment of additional U.S. military equipment to Ukraine has helped to stabilize the front lines, although Ukrainian forces remain under pressure.
“While I think the next two or three months are going to be probably the hardest this year for Ukraine, I came back from the front seeing the situation as, overall, improving, and the fight on a better trajectory than it was this winter and spring,” Michael Kofman, a Carnegie Endowment for International Peace senior fellow, told War on the Rocks last week in a discussion of his latest research trip to the war zone. “It will take several months for it to improve, and this is … the greatest period of vulnerability for Ukraine right now … but it does increasingly seem unlikely that the Russian forces will be able to turn their gains into operationally significant breakthroughs, or that there will be a collapse of the front.”
Vseviov, for his part, said Russia is also paying an “extremely costly” price for the war, a strain that could lead to a shift in the conflict in 2025 — if Ukraine’s international supporters also weather the pressure from Russia over the next several months.
“Now come 2025 — and assuming that we’re able to stay the course, and looking at the macro trends, our production picking up, our financing picking up — this ‘time is on my side’ argument is not going to carry water for [Putin] anymore. So he has to derail us at all costs this year,” Vseviov said.” I think the fever will break sometime in 2025. Thus it might get worse in the coming months of the fall. So we need to brace ourselves for that eventuality and then deal with every case, but not fall in his traps.”
The increase in defense spending by NATO allies is expected to flow toward “a shopping list” of military capabilities that each country needs to play its part in NATO’s emerging plans to defend alliance territory, according to Cavoli, who emphasized that these investments will be necessary in any plausible future scenario.
“We are going to have a situation where Russia is reconstituting its force, is located on the borders of NATO, is led by largely the same people as it is right now, is convinced that we’re the adversary, and is very, very angry,” he said.
Vseviov’s remarks, Cavoli suggested, reflect a widening consensus within Europe about the threat posed by Russia.
“I think it’s under-appreciated in our country, in the United States, just how much our European allies have awakened to the fact that the house is on fire,” Cavoli said. “This is not just rhetoric. This is true concern about the stability of their continent and the survival of their states. So this is fundamental, and we should recognize it and encourage its development.”
Russia’s development of a space-based nuclear weapons system poses a threat to “the entire modern way of life,” according to a top U.S. general.
“It’s a completely indiscriminate weapon,” Gen. Stephen Whiting, the commander of U.S. Space Command, told the Aspen Security Forum on Wednesday. “It would affect the United States satellites, Chinese satellites, Russian satellites, European satellites, Indian satellites, Japanese satellites. And so, it’s really holding at risk the entire modern way of life. And it’s just an incredibly reckless decision.”
The anxiety over a potential Russian deployment of a nuclear weapon into space has percolated in public discussions of nuclear arms and national security since February, when the Biden administration briefed Congress on the emerging Russian weapon. And while a White House official at the time said that such a weapon could not “cause physical destruction here on Earth,” another senior officer emphasized the far-reaching ramifications of such a weapon.
“If they were to detonate a nuclear weapon in space, it is not just going to affect military targets,” Air Force Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Kruse, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said during an appearance alongside Whiting. “The issue is, everything that’s in line of sight at low earth orbit is going to have immediate effects.”
Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Kruse, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, speaks during the open portion of a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Capitol Hill, Thursday, May 2, 2024, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)
The deployment of the weapon would be a violation of Russia’s obligations under the Outer Space Treaty, as Whiting noted.
“It has been an expectation, for mankind, that we will not put a nuclear weapon or weapons of mass destruction in space,” he said. “And now they’re doing that, potentially.”
Kruse noted that U.S. intelligence officials have been tracking the project “for almost a decade,” saying Russia is “getting close” to finishing their preparations. The system is just one example of how Russia — and, perhaps even more significantly, China — are racing to expand their ability to attack U.S. assets in space.
“China aims to displace the United States as the global leader in space … and it counts on what they perceive as a U.S. over-reliance on space, and it intends to hold that capability at risk,” he said. “Both Russia and China view the use of space early on, even ahead of conflict, as important capabilities to deter or to compel behaviors.”
China showcased the ability to shoot down a satellite with a ground-based missile in 2007, when it destroyed one of its own weather satellites, a demonstration that created a “debris cloud” that raised the risk of an accident in orbit. Almost two decades later, Chinese researchers and officials have orchestrated a “tremendous increase” in anti-satellite weapons, as territorial disputes in the Indo-Pacific raise the risk of a conflict that could lead to war between the United States and China.
“Where we see that taking place is just a tremendous increase in directed energy weapons, in electronic warfare, in anti-satellite capabilities,” Kruse said. “Their on-orbit technology demonstrators are demonstrating some capability and intent that really does have military applications.”
Those developments are just one part, however, of a “kill web,” as Whiting put it — an interlocking network of systems designed to enable Chinese forces to attack American positions “throughout the Indo-Pacific” region.
“China is building a kill web, if you will, in space — tailor-built to find, fix, track, target, and help provide engagement vectors for over-the-horizon fires against U.S. and allied forces throughout the Indo-Pacific,” Whiting said. “And so, we have a role there to help defend those U.S. forces from China’s more precise, more lethal, and more far-ranging terrestrial army, navy, and air force.”
In Kruse’s telling, the space-based nuclear weapon is an example of Russia looking for “asymmetric” weapons to offset their relative weaknesses in conventional terms. “
“I don’t want to make anyone [seem] 10 feet tall,” he said. “Russia, you’re all aware, is probably having troubles with launch capabilities. They have trouble maintaining health of constellations in ways that we have not seen in the past … but they have reached out to China. … We see some cooperation that we have not seen in the past.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin wants to force a reduction of NATO’s operations in Europe as a condition of future negotiations to end the war in Ukraine, according to Russia’s top diplomat.
“A political and diplomatic settlement should be accompanied by specific steps for removing the threats to the Russian Federation emanating from the Western, Euroatlantic direction,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told the United Nations Security Council. “In the process of agreeing upon mutual guarantees and accords, it will also be necessary to take into account new geostrategic realities on the Eurasian continent where a common continental architecture of truly equal and indivisible security is being formed.”
That was an apparent reference to a pair of initiatives that the Kremlin has proffered as mainstays of Putin’s long-term strategy. Moscow proposed integrating its various strategic initiatives into a “Greater Eurasian Partnership” with China while also demanding that the United States and Western European allies curtail their military ties with the central and Eastern European countries that have joined NATO in recent years.
“We are ready for looking for a balance of interests,” Lavrov claimed.
Lavrov’s visit to New York was greeted with scorn from Ukrainian and Western officials, who dismissed his claim to stand for “multilateral cooperation” as an elaborate display of hypocrisy.
“While you tell us how you believe the world order can become more just, democratic, and sustainable, your military is systematically bombing civilians in Ukraine in an unprovoked war of aggression and in flagrant violation of the U.N. Charter,” British Ambassador to the United Nations Barbara Woodward said in response. “The war in Ukraine is a stark reminder of what kind of world order Russia really wants: a world where might is right, and powerful countries can bully and invade other countries with impunity.”
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s team rebuffed Lavrov’s renewal of the demands. “The problem with the formulation from the foreign minister is there’s no one in Europe that is threatening Russia,” State Department spokesman Matthew Miller told reporters on Tuesday. “What Russia seems to see as a threat is a democracy functioning on its borders. And that’s just not a legitimate view. There’s not been a military threat. No one has threatened to take Russian territory, to take Russian land.”
Still, China’s envoy at the council joined Lavrov in denouncing NATO. “History has amply proved that wherever NATO’s hand extends, turmoil and chaos will ensue,” Chinese Ambassador Fu Cong said Tuesday during the council meeting. “China hereby advises NATO and certain countries to conduct some soul-searching and stop being the troublemakers who jeopardize common security at the expense of others.”
The Chinese envoy fumed over the idea of NATO “shifting the blame to countries outside the region to frame them on the issue of Ukraine,” a reference to the trans-Atlantic consensus that China stands as a “decisive enabler” of Russia’s war in Ukraine through its support of Russia’s defense industry. And yet, the allies “have not decided” how to confront China over this policy, according to Lithuania’s top diplomat, because of the web of economic ties to the communist power.
“We are entangled in a very similar relationship [as the one that] we had with Russia,” Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis said last week at the Hudson Institute. “It doesn’t allow us to take a very clear position. … It assists Russia, obviously, in its war, but also it assists China, for them to grow their strength in military, to find a way how to avoid sanctions, to find a way how to avoid this European or Western annoyance, let’s say, about them and still be a real kingmaker in this conflict and also possibly in any other that they would entertain being part of.”
Lavrov’s remarks renewed a demand that Russia previously made two months prior to the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
“When we say that NATO facilities and all kinds of activities that are provocative for Russia need to be rolled back to the positions that existed in 1997 when the NATO-Russia Founding Act was signed, we are not bluffing,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said in December 2021.
That month, Russian officials released a so-called draft treaty demanding that NATO allies “shall not conduct any military activity on the territory of Ukraine as well as other States in Eastern Europe, in the South Caucasus and in Central Asia.” That proviso would deliver a blow to the allies who joined NATO after the Cold War — a group of 14 countries at the time of the draft treaty’s publication that has since expanded to include Sweden and Finland.
“You visited Vilnius — it’s a lovely city, it’s a lovely country,” Landsbergis said during the Hudson event, referring to his nation’s capital. “And it’s lovely today because it has NATO. We have [the] EU. We’re part of it. We’re safe, we’re secure, and we’re prosperous because of this umbrella.”
Miller, the State Department spokesman, said it’s not clear whether China would back Russia’s initiative to negotiate over the presence of that umbrella.
“With respect to China, so look, we have seen, as you said, further relationship between China and Russia, and it’s not just with respect to revitalizing the defense industrial base. It is also with respect to being a major strategic partner of Russia,” Miller said. “You’ve seen close ties between President Putin and President Xi, with visits between the two. And so I don’t — I can’t ultimately predict where it will go.”
As the 75th anniversary summit of NATO leaders approached, President Joe Biden and other alliance heads took a calculated risk: the allies would develop a strategy to contain threats from Russia — but not this year.
“Because of the elections in the United States…The strategy was to avoid any kind of controversy during the summit, and that would be a success to the Biden administration,” a senior Central European official told the Washington Examiner on the sidelines of the summit. “And that’s why we have the NATO summit that we have — with the decisions that have been made, and the decisions that have been postponed — to avoid controversy.”
In the event, the pageantry of the summit was swamped by a cascade of anxiety over Biden’s feeble performance in a June debate with former President Donald Trump — a political disaster that has prompted more than a dozen House and Senate Democrats to call for Biden to abandon his re-election campaign. That uproar reverberated through the convention center where the NATO summit took place, as European officials contemplated the ramifications of a U.S. presidential election that seems more uncertain than ever, amid a gathering storm of threats from an “axis of upheaval” led by China and Russia.
“Whoever gets elected in November, we have to get along with that person — whether it’s Biden, or some other Democrat, or whether it’s Trump,” another senior European official said. “We just have to get along.
And, for the officials involved in the negotiations over the vaunted Washington Summit Declaration, the stentorian rhetoric of the Washington Summit Declaration couldn’t mask the fact that the most pressing problems before the alliance have been left to a very uncertain future.
“I was expecting to see the contours of the solution here at the summit,” a European ambassador to NATO who spoke on condition of anonymity told the Washington Examiner. “I don’t see them yet, to be honest.”
Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer, left, looks on as U.S. President Joe Biden speaks, as he introduced Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, right, at the closing ceremony during an event on the Ukraine Compact at the NATO Summit at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center, in Washington, Thursday, July 11, 2024. (Stefan Rousseau/Pool Photo via AP)
Some of that irresolution was long-planned. A major diplomatic effort to see NATO begin the process of inviting Ukraine into the alliance foundered at the Vilnius Summit in 2023, chiefly due to objections from Biden and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, and there was no serious effort to reopen that controversy in Washington, even though several NATO foreign ministers, at an Atlantic Council event on the sidelines of the summit, were candid about their belief that Ukraine’s application “should be advanced.” Instead, the allies agreed to say that Ukraine remains “on its irreversible path…to NATO membership,” at some unstated future point.
“With all our heart, we wish that your government will have strong leadership that, if anything, is even more tough against Russia,” a senior political leader of a NATO member-state told the Washington Examiner. “Putin respects strength and is provoked by weakness and doubt…And so far, the West has been so ambiguous, drawing some red lines [on Western support for Ukraine] and then stepping over them. And that does not work. It just encourages Putin.”
The allies agreed to develop a strategy to “constrain and contest Russia’s aggressive actions” for the leaders to consider when they meet in The Hague next year.
“We are determined to constrain and contest Russia’s aggressive actions and to counter its ability to conduct destabilizing activities towards NATO and Allies,” the Washington Summit Declaration says. “For our next Summit, we will develop recommendations on NATO’s strategic approach to Russia, taking into account the changing security environment.”
That language represents a long-awaited breakthrough — but an insufficient one, in the judgement of the allies most vulnerable in the event of a war with Russia.
“We don’t need to talk about the upcoming elections, because the question is right now, and it has been last year in Vilnius, it has been a year before in Madrid, and I don’t think that we have a right answer,” Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis said during an Atlantic Council event. “And at this point, I think that the main thing is that, unfortunately, we’re not exactly there, where we should be, in order to meet the threat that Russia and its allies pose to [our] alliance.”
Some allies and analysts familiar with the discussions blamed the usual suspects for thwarting a more advanced discussion.
“The U.S. and Germany set a very low bar for this summit, and then they rigorously enforced it,” Kurt Volker, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO, told the Washington Examiner. “And the Baltic States, and Poles, and others tried to urge more; the U.S. and Germany said ‘no, no, no, no. We’re not doing this. We’re not going there.’ … They just punted on a lot of stuff.”
If that decision seemed like the risk-avoidant choice to Biden’s team over the last several months, it takes on a new meaning in the light of his debate crisis.
“They didn’t want to have any type of policy discussions about, what is it that we really want?” Stefanie Babst, a former chief strategic policy analyst in NATO’s international staff, told the Washington Examiner. Next year, she said, “it will be a very controversial exercise, not just because of Trump…in terms of our strategic objective, do we want Russia to see defeated in Ukraine? Yes. Do we want to see Russian forces fully withdrawn from Ukraine territory? Yes. Do we want the Putin regime [to be seen] defeated? Big, big controversy.”
For many Europeans, the political cacophony around Biden’s campaign during the summit persuaded them that Trump will be the next president — a prospect that promises “unpredictability,” as multiple official said, for better or worse. The Russia strategy will be drafted in parallel with an ongoing debate about whether European defense spending should flow chiefly to European companies, another official emphasized, or if the allies will have instead a “transatlantic defense market” that could redound to the benefit of U.S. companies and workers.
“Is it better for Vladimir Vladimirovich to have Trump or not?” the NATO ambassador said. “I don’t think Trump is bad news. It’s like a nemesis. It will teach Europeans the hard way that they should value their security and stop really supporting Russia through trade, spruce up European military might. The debate will be how much spoils will go to business on one side or the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.”
That wry outlook is what passes for optimism. “We cannot really be too dependent on the U.S. We fully understand that this shift that has already taken place, that it’s much more about the Indo-Pacific for the US, and in the end, we should be able to defend ourselves against Russia, but preferably, preferably with the U.S.,” another NATO ambassador said. “And we need to have a Germany that is really investing in defense. That’s really the only solution.”
For Landsbergis, NATO’s hesitance to grapple with those controversies could come at a bloody price. The Lithuanian foreign minister believes that NATO could look back on these years of war in Ukraine as a period of relative calm before greater dangers arise — because the allies refuse to muster the political will to develop their own strategy before Putin forces the issue.
“Well, Putin has not yet done everything to unite us enough in order to bring the answer that is needed,” he told the Atlantic Council. “That’s the way I see it, and it’s very unfortunate, and that most likely that the future will be . . . that Putin will force us to do more.”
If Landsbergis is correct, then even the promise to deliver a strategy may prove less significant than its proponents hope.
“I think this is a paper exercise,” Volker said. “Any reality is going to be driven by who gets elected president and what they and the allies want to do.”
China’s space program has emerged as a source of anxiety for a NATO alliance already alarmed by Russia’s reputed interest in placing nuclear weapons in orbit.
“We are concerned by developments in the PRC’s space capabilities and activities,” NATO declared in the Washington Summit Declaration, a joint statement adopted during the NATO summit in Washington, D.C. “We call on the PRC to support international efforts to promote responsible space behavior. The PRC continues to rapidly expand and diversify its nuclear arsenal with more warheads and a larger number of sophisticated delivery systems.”
Those statements represent a substantial shift in tone from just a few years ago when a spare reference to the “opportunities and challenges” presented by China marked the alliance’s first mention of the communist regime in a NATO summit document.
Yet Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine has forced the United States and its allies to cast a wary eye on military and technological developments in China, particularly given Beijing’s role as a “decisive enabler” of Russia’s military.
“The People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) stated ambitions and coercive policies continue to challenge our interests, security and values,” the allies said. “The deepening strategic partnership between Russia and the PRC and their mutually reinforcing attempts to undercut and reshape the rules-based international order, are a cause for profound concern. We are confronted by hybrid, cyber, space, and other threats and malicious activities from state and non-state actors.”
The angst about China percolated around Washington even though Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and the trans-Atlantic alliance’s support for Ukraine is taking center stage. While the war in Ukraine has exposed the inadequacy of Western investments in customary defense industry necessities such as the production of artillery and other weapons, China looms as a perceived threat on the cutting edge of technology.
“What I see when I look at all of us, especially in Europe, is that China is going to win this race. I’m not afraid if the U.S. is going to win the race, but if China is going to win this race, then I am afraid,” Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said during an appearance at the NATO Public Forum on the sidelines of the summit. “China is way ahead of Europe. … We cannot do this on our own, but please be aware about China, and let us not repeat the mistakes we have done about Russia, in the future, with China.”
Frederiksen hailed the presence of the leaders of Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, and Japan at the NATO summit as potential flags to mark a path to victory in the technology race, a sentiment echoed in the summit declaration.
“The Indo-Pacific is important for NATO, given that developments in that region directly affect Euro-Atlantic security,” the leaders agreed. “We welcome the continued contributions of our Asia-Pacific partners to Euro-Atlantic security. We are strengthening dialogue to tackle cross-regional challenges and are enhancing our practical cooperation, including through flagship projects in the areas of supporting Ukraine, cyber defense, countering disinformation, and technology. These projects will enhance our ability to work together on shared security interests.”
The allies’ general misgiving about China’s space and nuclear programs was punctuated by a sharper suspicion about Russia’s priorities: “We oppose any placement of nuclear weapons in orbit around Earth, which would violate Article IV of the Outer Space Treaty, and would gravely threaten global security.”
NATO allies have agreed to “accelerat[e] the integration of space into our planning, exercises, and multi-domain operations” — backstopped by the nuclear forces of the alliance.
“NATO’s deterrence and defense posture is based on an appropriate mix of nuclear, conventional, and missile defense capabilities, complemented by space and cyber capabilities,” they said. “We will employ military and non-military tools in a proportionate, coherent and integrated way to deter all threats to our security and respond in the manner, timing, and in the domain of our choosing.”
