President Biden delivered a threat to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, indicating that the United States would reconsider its support for Israel if the country did not change course regarding the conflict with Hamas. However, following the call, the President had hopes that his message had been received. During the conversation, Biden outlined specific commitments he expected from Israel. Netanyahu promised to announce more humanitarian aid for Gaza and signaled that he would respond to other demands in the coming days. Israel authorized the opening of a key port and land crossing for supplies in response to Biden’s requests.
The White House is closely monitoring the situation and expects Israel to issue new military procedures to avoid harming civilians and relief workers. While the President’s threat was described as “very strident,” he did not specify any consequences if Israel did not comply. The hope is that Biden’s strong stance will prompt Netanyahu to make necessary changes, potentially using leverage provided by the President as a means to overcome challenges within his government. However, the differing perspectives, goals, and political pressures between the two leaders make it uncertain whether a clash can be avoided.
Biden has faced criticism from Republicans for pressuring Israel instead of focusing on Hamas, but some Democrats feel he did not go far enough in addressing the conflict. The President’s threat was prompted by the killing of seven relief workers, leaving him shaken. Israel’s investigation results were shared with the U.S., and some military officers were reprimanded or removed. However, critics are calling for an independent inquiry. American officials will review the investigation carefully to assess it. The incident could represent a shift in priorities, focusing on civilian protection and humanitarian aid, though the impact remains to be seen.
While Biden has supported Israel’s right to respond to terrorist attacks, he has expressed concerns about the scale of the military operation in Gaza. He warned against specific actions that could risk civilian lives, and Netanyahu has not fully complied with these warnings. There is uncertainty regarding the extent of American influence on Israel’s conduct during the conflict. Observers note a change in tone from Biden’s administration, signaling a more direct approach in conveying expectations to Israel. However, specific consequences, such as withholding military aid or supporting a more forceful cease-fire resolution, remain unclear.
Former envoys and analysts believe that Biden’s warning has gotten Israel’s attention, leading to initial moves announced by the country. However, these steps are seen as incremental and may not substantially change conditions for civilians in Gaza. There is skepticism that Netanyahu may simply be making minimum changes to avoid severe consequences without addressing underlying issues. The situation remains fluid, with the potential for further developments in the coming weeks. Ultimately, the impact of Biden’s threat and Israel’s response will depend on the actions taken in the aftermath of the call and whether significant changes are implemented to address the ongoing conflict.
