Backing Into Armageddon?

Smoke billows from a boat following Israeli strikes at Port of Gaza on Oct. 8, 2023. (Mohammed Salem/Reuters)

Commentary

Is the Biden administration’s decision to build a “temporary” port on the beaches of Gaza a well-considered plan?

Questions That Need Answers

For example, is a temporary port really needed to provide humanitarian aid to the Palestinian civilian population? The United States, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Jordan are already providing aid via airdrops. There’s no reason why that can’t continue and even increase, if warranted.

Furthermore, just how “temporary” would the port be? What are the criteria for putting it in? What are the criteria for removing it?

Those questions need answers.

Under the current circumstances, the reasoning for installing the port is compelling only in its potential to make things even worse in Gaza than they already are.

Consider the fact that almost 14,000 trucks of humanitarian aid have flowed into Gaza since the beginning of the war. Some of them have reached civilians, but some have not because of dangerous conditions, Hamas’s stopping it, and other factors. As a result, the flow of aid trucks has dwindled.

Related Stories

Biden, Netanyahu Speak for the First Time in More Than a Month as Tensions Rise

3/18/2024

Israeli Troops Raid Gaza’s Al Shifa Hospital

3/18/2024

What makes the administration think that the same risk factors affecting Israeli aid won’t apply to U.S. aid?

Why, for instance, would Israel trust the Biden administration when such a move rewards Hamas and damages its war effort to remove Hamas from Gaza? Why would Gazan Palestinians view the administration with any less suspicion after its support for Israel and the death of so many Palestinians? Besides, most Palestinians still support Hamas and the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks.

Port or no port, that is unlikely to change.

American Boots on the Beach Born of Cynical Politics?

There is also the great possibility that the U.S. presence via the port could widen the war. After all, American boots may not be “on the ground” in Gaza, but they’ll be wading along the shoreline. That’s a distinction without a difference and puts American troops at unnecessary risk. Therefore, some questions about this new policy are certainly in order, even though few in the mainstream media seem to be in the mood to ask them.

Perhaps the Biden administration’s port idea isn’t born of a desire to benefit the people in Gaza but is much more cynical than that.

The politics of the temporary port may be aimed not at the Palestinians in Gaza or the West Bank, but rather at the Arab Americans in places such as Dearborn, Michigan, and the far-left voters in the United States. Both of these voting groups are angry at the Biden administration for its support of Israel and threaten President Joe Biden’s chances of reelection. Michigan is a swing state that President Biden won by just 154,000 votes against President Donald Trump in 2020, and Arab Americans are a key voting bloc in that state. The progressive “Abandon Biden” movement in Michigan is real and growing.

In other words, the temporary port that the Biden administration is proposing may be nothing more than a cynical political move that puts U.S. troops at risk.

Another Opportunity to Hit the United States

But the Biden administration may not be the only group with cynical ideas. Clearly, once the port is in place, U.S. troops will be in the theater of war. That makes the dynamics of war operations and the political implications more complex. All kinds of events become possible, most of them not good.

For example, what happens if the port is attacked by Hamas or some other radical Islamic group or nation, such as Iran? They certainly have no problem attacking our bases in Jordan, Syria, and Iraq, having done so more than 170 times since the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks. Why wouldn’t they take the opportunity to do so in Gaza? Why wouldn’t they use the U.S. presence to inspire “resistance fighters” from the surrounding areas?

Would this administration return fire against Iran? If such a situation developed, the outcomes could escalate faster than anyone imagined.

Thinking a bit more geopolitically, why wouldn’t Russia feel entitled to do the same as the United States, particularly in light of Israel’s support for Ukraine? Besides, it would provide a good excuse for Russia to insert itself in the vicinity of the Eastern Mediterranean and the oil and natural gas fields that Israel controls.

What About the Hostages?

Another question: Why wouldn’t the Biden administration make the release of American hostages held by Hamas a condition for aid to the Palestinians?

In fact, why aren’t the American hostages at the forefront of the Biden administration’s policy toward Hamas? Why not tell Hamas that U.S. pressure on Israel for a ceasefire is contingent upon the release of the hostages?

The cynical answer is that the administration’s focus is on being seen as a “global leader” rather than worrying over a few American hostages.

No Ceasefire From Hamas

Could such a U.S. presence in Gaza hinder the Israel Defense Forces in its mission and send Hamas the message that the United States has got its back at the same time that the Biden administration is supporting Israel? Some version of that is likely.

As it is, the United States has been unable to broker a ceasefire. An argument could be made that Hamas doesn’t want one, because the longer the war and the more civilian casualties, the more anti-Israel sentiment in the world grows. That shouldn’t surprise anyone, given that Hamas has declared that it seeks not a two-party solution, but rather the destruction of Israel and the Jewish people. In short, Hamas is playing the long game against Israel.

Will a US Presence Be the Catalyst for More Nations to Join the War?

The reality is that Hamas will never make any permanent peace with Israel. How can Israel agree to any deal when it knows Hamas wants to destroy it?

It’s clear that Israel sees itself as waging a war for its very survival, and Hamas is happy to oblige. That is why, as a political group and a military force, Hamas must be destroyed. Its leaders, no matter where they may live, in luxury penthouses in Qatar or in London mansions, must be brought to justice.

What’s more, given the fact that the vast majority of Palestinians support Hamas, there doesn’t appear to be an answer that will allow a lasting peace to be put into place. But adding the U.S. presence via a port is not the answer.

The focus of the Biden administration should be on doing all it can to secure the release of American hostages. It should not be rewarding Hamas for its Oct. 7 attack or, for that matter, putting U.S. lives unnecessarily at risk for the Palestinian civilians who cheered when the attacks happened.

Nor should it engage in behavior that could make things much worse than they already are.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.