Let’s Choose Peace
The US can use our power and influence constructively
I haven’t given up yet on the chance that America can live up to our responsibility as leader of the free world. In my lifetime (almost 67 years), that has manifested as economic and military domination. But there are signs that people here and abroad are tired of this game, and our enormous appetite for spending money we don’t have may force an overdue reckoning with our priorities.
Clearly, the Gaza conflict prompted this post way outside my comfort zones of economics and Independent voters’ rights. I’m no expert on this or any other war; however, I can no longer ignore the hypocrisy of our national policies and feel obliged to share my thoughts with others here on Medium.
Speaking of comfort zones… I don’t think there are any when it comes to war. Relatively speaking, though, the warring parties and those who side with them are not torn, because they are convinced of their own cause and see no other choice. They seek swift resolution in their favor and to that end, want everyone on the fence to see things their way and support them unconditionally.
I cannot help saying this sounds an awful lot like our elections. And if you are firmly committed to either side, you may as well stop reading now.
For others — perhaps most of us — the comfort zone is blindness to the ugly truth. We ignore the issue altogether or offer platitudes (like flashing the peace sign).
Those who aren’t already committed but pay attention are likely to have mixed emotions, because it would not be war without merits and flaws in both sides’ perceptions, arguments, and actions. So far, anyway, I have been watching and reading enough about this war to see that I’m not the only one considering meaningful distinctions between Hamas, Palestinians, and Muslims and between Zionists, Israelis, and Jews in attempting to understand the conflict.
Outcome goals and policy analysis should be front and center, yet both seem to be afterthoughts for the Biden Administration. I’m inclined to think they know a lot more than me or any other bloggers; it’s just that they choose war as if out of habit.
Many of us were dissatisfied with by our official response to the terrorist attack by Hamas. Carrier ships were dispatched to the area immediately. Talk about disproportionate! That’s how we roll, though. It doesn’t take much to trigger assembly of a SWAT team in many of our cities. Why would we be more patient and tolerant of risk elsewhere?
A day or two later, Secretary Blinken promised Israel they would “never” have to defend themselves without our aid. My jaw dropped. I am disturbed by the thought that we would make such a promise to any nation.
Then President Biden asked for emergency funding to support the Israeli invasion. As if they needed our help. Does anyone really doubt they can destroy Hamas?
I realize there are valid concerns about the potential for escalation with Hezbollah and Iran. I suppose military advisors insisted on these measures as a warning. However, they amounted to giving Israel permission to do whatever they wanted — with our backing — because this was their 9/11.
Border crossings were closed, supplies were cut off, and a million or so people in the northern half of the Strip were told to evacuate (supposedly to the other half, since there was nowhere else for them to go).
Israel did not seem concerned about civilian displacement or casualties, and we vetoed a UN resolution calling for a cease-fire to deal with that. Two weeks later, after it became clear that lots of people who might vote next year were concerned about Palestinians, President Biden said something. His timing told us all we needed to know about priorities.
It’s worth noting here that my Congressman, Don Beyer (D-VA) offered a very articulate statement of a position that I largely agree with.
I don’t expect Israel to turn their cheek. Neither do I expect our President to abandon the alliance. What I would like to see, though, is more appreciation of the value of life. In this case, it would have been reasonable to ask Israel how they planned to help evacuate Gaza. We could have offered to assist with that instead of showing how eager we were to help them kick ass.
Other writers have pointed out that we’re just not that nice, citing as examples the way we handle our border with Mexico and don’t even bother reporting on wars in Africa (Sudan and Congo) that affect far more people but lack strategic value to the US.
Most of our official humanitarian assistance is war-related, i.e., mitigating collateral damage and nation building activities — both of which aim to make our military interventions more acceptable at home and abroad. Our reputation is such that anyone contemplating war will lobby to get us on their side, if they can. This presents numerous opportunities for influence, but it also creates unintended consequences.
It seems to me that additional resources encourage conflict by, essentially, adding fuel to the fire. Absent US weapons, supplies, and other assistance, many of them may not be capable of waging a war for long. Is that so bad?
We should resist the temptation to take advantage of conflicts abroad by choosing sides and assist refugees, instead. Any war that causes a massive exodus of civilians is pretty clearly lacking public support. Their need is undeniable, and our assistance could save lives and make a healthy recovery from the trauma far more likely. It would also help neighbors who worry about the cost of building and maintaining camps and perhaps absorbing settlers. And it might make Americans feel good about having relieved suffering instead of contributing to it.
