X Close

How Biden blindsided Netanyahu The Israeli PM has flown into a maelstrom

The pair embrace during Biden's visit to Israel last year (BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)

The pair embrace during Biden's visit to Israel last year (BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)


July 24, 2024   5 mins

There are lame duck administrations. And then there is Washington DC in July 2024. There isn’t even a term for it: what do you call an administration whose leader just exited stage left before his own party could lower the boom on him? A ghost administration? A phantom presidency? Any meetings with Biden have been rendered redundant. You’ve got to feel for Benjamin Netanyahu.

During his visit this week, the Israeli prime minister could meet with Kamala Harris — but to what purpose? Even if she had the bandwidth to focus on the Middle East, she would be best advised to avoid any kind of substantive utterance. In an election that is likely to be close, “niche voters” matter greatly, particularly those who care about Israel and Gaza. And based on her time in office, we know how Harris handles difficult challenges: through evasion, inaction, and lots of beaming smiles. Indeed, she has already implemented that approach vis-à-vis Netanyahu. In a move that will be welcomed by the anti-Israel contingent, she has “declined” to attend his address to Congress; and in a nod to the pro-Israel lobby, she also stated that she will meet with him privately.

As Netanyahu negotiates Washington’s corridors and backrooms, he will no doubt be hoping for hints of how the two possible next administrations are likely to deal with him and with Israel. Trump, who last night announced his plans to meet with Netanyahu, can be expected to be blunt. But it will be more difficult for him to glean what a Harris administration would mean for him, as well as his rivals abroad. So, in honour of his visit-in-vain, let us speculate.

In her first speech as Biden’s designated successor, Harris went full-on fulsome: he has achieved more in his one term than other American presidents managed in two; his legacy is unmatched; yadda yadda. Since she has no policy profile of her own after four years of unmatched invisibility, we can only take her at her word — and project onto her the basis of Biden’s policies, plus what we know of her personality.

If we take a good long look at Biden’s presidency, one theme emerges with startling clarity: indecisiveness. This was a man who was uncomfortable with leadership and instead was constantly scanning for approbation. As a result, some initially sound policies failed, some good ideas died on the vine, and the riderless horses of ideology and emotion were given their head.

In the immediate aftermath of Hamas’s October 7 attack, for instance, Biden expressed strong solidarity with Israel. But then pro-Palestinian factions (and even some pro-Hamas voices) on American campuses and in portions of the Arab-American electorate erupted in protest. What was “Genocide Joe” to do? Biden’s formula was something for everyone, and nothing for all — except a big bill.

Weapons and aid to Israel continued, accompanied by preachy admonitions to exercise restraint. The humanitarian concerns for Palestinian civilians were assuaged by his Potemkin Pier: a floating piece of expensive engineering nonsense that promptly failed and had to be expensively dismantled, as all the technical experts warned from the start. The proposed peace plan — a permanent ceasefire that any Israeli interested in survival could hardly agree to — was already floundering. The months just before a US presidential election, let alone one of such exceptional volatility, are unlikely to produce a breakthrough.

A similar picture emerges in relation to Ukraine. True, Biden has been steadfast in his support for Kyiv — steadfast, but indecisive. From the day Russia invaded, the Ukrainians and Zelensky knew exactly what weapons and support they needed to protect their population and their infrastructure. Biden gave it to them — but in staggered deliveries, dribbling it out across the terrible months, wasting the momentum of the early counteroffensive and contributing to the grinding, bloody and no longer hopeful slog this has become. A negotiated settlement that includes territorial losses for Ukraine seems inevitable. Can anyone picture Harris as a tough negotiator against Putin?

“Can anyone picture Harris as a tough negotiator against Putin?”

Next stop: Afghanistan. By the time Biden became president, this conflict was sucking up far too many resources. Kudos to him for recognising that and continuing with the troop withdrawal that had been initiated by Trump, instead of seeing it as a partisan issue. But a troop withdrawal of that magnitude has to be properly prepared and executed. You don’t start by shutting down your defensive capabilities while relying on a civilian airport in the middle of a city full of desperate people. Even then, a prompt reaction could have saved the day. When the Afghan public started mobbing the airport, flights should have ceased immediately and the airport shut down until a process was in place. The Taliban were cooperating at that point, happy to see us leave and willing to facilitate our departure.

But with the US media slamming Biden for “abandoning” our Afghan allies, his response was to ramp up the speed of the evacuations, which, predictably, caused a stampede. The chaos was an open invitation to Isis, who promptly attacked, killing 13 American soldiers who had been given the hopeless task of guarding Abbey Gate, plus 170 in the roiling Afghan crowd. Those were the only US casualties during the entire two years of withdrawal negotiations and implementation, and they were completely avoidable.

The list goes on. Essentially, Biden “gave” Iraq to Iran, by abandoning his own initial assessment of the situation. The result was exactly what he had feared: sectarian conflict, Shi’a dominance, and an Iranian influence verging on total control of the Baghdad government. Biden even sold out the one little piece of his plan that was working: the semi-autonomous Kurdish region. There, an enthusiastically pro-American population, plus a Christian minority that the Kurds had generously integrated, were repeatedly ignored, rebuffed and denied support by the Biden administration. By way of appreciation, Baghdad is now preparing to ignominiously evict our remaining troops.

As our final example, we must cite his choice of VP. Even if Biden deluded himself that he was up to a second term, and that the voters would agree, he knew that at some point his vice president would become his party’s candidate for the highest office. Yet by what measure of merit could he possibly have thought that Harris is the one? When he chose her, her popularity was so low and her fundraising appeal so non-existent that she had dropped out of the 2020 election months before the Democratic caucus. Observers decried her propensity to randomly change position on key issues. She had, and still has, no foreign policy experience, and did not use her time as vice president to develop a discernible identity beyond what is now being celebrated by some: her race and gender.

Faced with negotiating with such a figure, let alone Biden himself, Netanyahu may be wishing that he, too, had Covid and could go into isolation. Angry Israeli protesters sent him on his way at Ben Gurion, and even angrier American protesters are besieging the Watergate Hotel, where he is staying. Huge demonstrations are expected outside of Congress, with the demand that he be arrested. His hope, in the considerably different circumstances of just a few weeks ago, had been for a statesmanlike reception and substantive talks about a hostage release and ceasefire with an option to continue the degradation of Hamas’s power.

Biden may want one final accomplishment, some kind of Middle East deal. But can a lame duck and an ICC-wanted leader unpopular at home pull off a win? Don’t hold your breath.


Cheryl Benard is an academic and an author.

 


Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

20 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Paddy Taylor
Paddy Taylor
1 month ago

Netanyahu and the Israeli Govt were relatively surprised and pleased with the support they received from the Biden administration since Oct 7th – but there was absolutely no love lost between them before that date.
It was surely significant that Joe Biden, in all his supportive statements towards Israel in the aftermath of the attack, and his condemnation of Hamas, never once mentioned Iran. Was it from a sense of guilt?
You could easily – and justifiably – make the case that Biden had both armed and financed the terrorists that attacked Israel. His behaviour emboldened the Mullahs and filled their coffers – I say it is Biden’s behaviour, though it is far more likely it was Obama-led, given that I think we all now know that whoever has been devising policy over the last 3 ½ years, it’s not been Joe.
US sanctions against Iran had been in place since the Carter presidency. They’d been toughened several times and were working – it was those sanctions that first brought Tehran to the negotiating table. At which point Obama decided to sign the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with the Iranians, a deal that defied all diplomatic logic, barely slowed their nuclear program and simply gave Tehran everything they wanted.
Israel had begun back-channel talks with several Sunni Gulf states during Obama’s 2nd term, but although his administration were not involved, they must have been aware of the opportunities for peace that it offered the region – and the world. The talks were based on their mutual fear and mistrust of a soon-to-be nuclear Iran. Obama could have fostered those relationships – but instead turned towards Tehran – presumably thanks to the influence of Robert Malley.
Israeli and Saudi Arabian diplomats were openly questioning whether the Obama administration were simply naïvely appeasing Iran with a nuclear deal or actually if the US was deliberately courting Iran as an ally – for what purpose i couldn’t gues. It is still unclear what they hoped this disastrous policy might achieve. Over that time, according to a former State Dept special advisor on Iran, Malley and his negotiating team “purposefully funneled billions of dollars to (Iran) through lack of sanctions enforcement and provision of sanctions relief that has given them somewhere between $50 and $80 billion over the last two and a half years.”..adding .. “There is a straight line from Obama’s giveaway to Iran, to Biden’s enriching of Iran — to Iran’s war on Israel.” So when Obama said the other day, “we all have blood on our hands”, if he was talking about his own (and Biden’s tribute-act) administration then I think he was absolutely right.
The JCPOA claimed that “The goal for these negotiations is to reach a mutually-agreed long-term comprehensive solution that would ensure Iranˈs nuclear program will be exclusively peaceful. Iran reaffirms that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek or develop any nuclear weapons.” Sounds great – were it not for the fact that, as most insiders have noted, the Iranians were acting in bad faith before the ink was dry.
Trump – alongside anyone acquainted with the JCPOA – knew it was a worthless deal. He pulled it, re-introduced sanctions and killed Qasem Solemaini, the architect of Iran’s proxy-war strategy. Far from tipping the world into WWIII, as the liberal media feared, his actions shut down Iran’s nuclear program and kept them quiet.
Once Trump was out of the White House, Biden immediately relaxed sanctions and re-introduced the JCPOA – without even trying to stiffen the terms of the deal.
The charge sheet against Biden is pretty damning: Iran has received $39.5 billion since Biden took office – thanks to his relaxing of sanctions. That buys a whole lotta terror. Possibly the risk of losing such largesse is what kept Hezbollah and other Iranian proxies out of the war, until now.
Military analysts have suggested the M4 rifles Hamas terrorists were toting are from the $7billion cache of materiel left for the Taliban after the panicked withdrawal from Kabul. Another unintended but woefully predictable consequence of Biden’s foreign policy.
It seems clear the timing of the Oct 7 attack was to sabotage chances of Sunni states like Saudi Arabia normalising relations with Israel. Biden’s actions (and inactions) are undermining the best chances for Middle East peace we’d seen in a generation. Another notable foreign policy failure.
And remember – Biden, being nominally pro-Israeli, is in the minority within the party. Harris will want to shore up support among the ignorant progressives who’ve lapped up the pro-Hamas propaganda, she’ll pander to them, undermining Israel at every turn.
 
In an increasingly dangerous world, we need strong leaders who project strength, resolve and good judgement. Biden’s obvious weakness emboldens all the enemies of the West. Kamala is worse – she can’t even blame it on dementia, she spent several years in the heart of Govt, yet is a political lightweight of unplumbed intellectual shallows who will hope to see the US step back away from Israel.
Now we are beyond the era of empire building, our armed forces are mainly about deterrence. Nothing about Biden’s presidency would deter anyone. Weakness merely invites attack.

mac mahmood
mac mahmood
1 month ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

It is difficult to see why people professing to be honourable should disapprove of people who are opposing a regime organised by terrorists.and wannabe nazis. See
State of Terror, How terrorism created modern Israel; Thomas Suarez. And
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-06-21/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/zionist-military-org-efforts-to-recruit-nazis-in-fight-against-the-british-are-revealed/00000188-d93a-d5fc-ab9d-db7ae0ea0000

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 month ago
Reply to  Paddy Taylor

In 1906 Shaikh Fazlollah Nuri opposed the adoption by Iran of a constitution based upon the French Constitution as un- Islamic, who was supported by Ayatollah Shaikh Mohsen Araki who taught Grand Ayatollah Khoemini. According to Khomeini one of the Shahs most depicable sins was signing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after WW2.
The most basic beliefs of the Mullahs of Iran are anti West and democracy and for any Western leader not to understand this is criminal negligence at best and treason at worst.
The problem is that westerners are not prepared to understand Shia theology and Iranian history which are the basis for the Shia’s world view; hence our mistakes.

Kevin Godwin
Kevin Godwin
1 month ago
Reply to  Charles Hedges

Exactly, in order to defeat one’s enemy you need to understand them. As America discovered against the Japanese during WW2.

James Twigg
James Twigg
1 month ago

He is going to be forced to compromise and jump through so many hoops to deal with the democrats that it may not be worth it. At least if he meets with Trump he will know where he stands with him.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago

What a cluster fluck. World leaders must be looking at America with either shock and dismay, or licking their fingers in anticipation.

I don’t get the choice of Harris. No doubt she’s a better candidate than Biden – who isn’t? – but she has basically zero campaign experience. She has been gifted every political position she has ever held. She did win an AG election in 2010 – beating a Republican by less than 1% – in California of all places!!!

IDK. She might turn out to be an extraordinary campaigner. Never say never I guess. It just seems like an incredibly risky strategy.

J Bryant
J Bryant
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

I agree with your overall view of Harris, but I think she has two things going for her. First, and most important, she’s not Trump. That’s how Biden got elected and it might just work for her too, especially if Trump returns to outrageous form in the next couple of months. Second, she’s female and not white. The symbolism of her candidacy alone will sway some people and that might be enough in a very tight race.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago
Reply to  J Bryant

I have no doubt she can win the election. It just seems like an unnecessary risk.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
1 month ago
Reply to  J Bryant

How did Biden getting elected work out? And there are at least as many people who are worn out with the focus on identity as those who are driven by it.

michael harris
michael harris
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

She was insurance for Biden against his defenestration. But it seems there was a get out clause in the policy.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Harris is who Dems are telling their voters to blindly support. Just like Dems previously told their voters to blindly support Biden, before the gaslighting failed and they then told voters to blindly support the “Joe must go” effort. The party whining about “our democracy” has now corrupted its primary process for a third straight election cycle. Harris was summarily rejected in 2020 by the same Dem voters now being told to line up.

Chris Whybrow
Chris Whybrow
1 month ago

The author seems strangely sympathetic to a man who has got almost 40,000 mostly innocent people killed, in addition to picking up numerous corruption charges. Besides, as I’ve said before, Iraq is a democratic, sovereign country, and they have every right to evict US troops given that they no longer need them.

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 month ago
Reply to  Chris Whybrow

Where do you get the figure of 40,000?

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 month ago
Reply to  Chris Whybrow

Whatever crazy

El Uro
El Uro
1 month ago
Reply to  Chris Whybrow

Wipe your snot!
If a million people live with the dream of killing all Israelis, Israelis don’t give a shit about your «humanism»

Dermot O'Sullivan
Dermot O'Sullivan
1 month ago

An interesting article but very little to do with the headline.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
1 month ago

Netanyahu may well meet with Trump, which makes sense if projections hold. Either way, what a telling move when the current head of state and his underling both refuse to meet with the head of an ally. One can support or oppose Israel’s prosecution of the current situation, but damn, it’s hard to overlook the clear message being sent here – Dems are the party of Hamas. They have always been the party of Hamas. It’s how their fixation on identity-based binaries directs them.
You cannot marinate in identity politics that frame each issue as one of an oppressor and the oppressed and side with a free, affluent society that respects minority rights and mirrors the West in many ways. Because to the left, the West is wrong by default on almost anything. Doesn’t matter that Hamas sees women as property. Doesn’t matter that Hamas would kill “queers for Palestine” without a second thought and laugh while doing it. Doesn’t matter that Hamas’ goal remains the extinction of the Jewish state.

mac mahmood
mac mahmood
1 month ago

Referring to the people in control of Palestine as Israelis is not unlike referring to the Mafiosi as the Society of Friends.
By what logic does one play host to someone who is at the head of a pirate state set up and propped up by acts of terror? See
State of Terror, How terrorism created modern Israel; Thomas Suarez.
Also
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-06-21/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/zionist-military-org-efforts-to-recruit-nazis-in-fight-against-the-british-are-revealed/00000188-d93a-d5fc-ab9d-db7ae0ea0000

0 0
0 0
1 month ago

You do have to feel for Bibi. How teo keep his country at war to stay out of jail, even if it threatens their existence? That’s not a project Kamala Harris is going to help him with. It was the adroitness with which she bit Bibi on the nose which impressed. She not only has the nerve to stand up to big beasts but the savvy to do it precisely enough to leave them defenseless.

And, with nary a Neocon among her or Trump’s FP advisors, maybe Washington can dial back to better times in ’25. The willful incessant hunt for ‘adversaries’ has only piled up difficulties for America and those who’d like to get on with them. With many Americans now feeling they’re the ones who’ve been Neoconned , foreign policy is not playing the same way in this campaign as commentators have come to expect.

Patrick Doyle
Patrick Doyle
1 month ago

There’s been a president whose cognitive decline has been steadily worsening, yet the visibility of his VP matched that decline.
What exactly was she doing all this time?