Israel promised it will open new humanitarian aid routes into Gaza on Thursday, immediately after its most important international ally appeared to threaten it with an ultimatum.
The United States welcomed news that a border crossing into northern Gaza and an Israeli port will both be used to deliver food and aid for the first time since the Mideast conflict erupted last fall.
Israel agreed to reopen the Erez land crossing and use the Ashohod port after receiving an unprecedented threat from U.S. President Joe Biden.
Hours earlier, the U.S. had warned its Middle Eastern ally to immediately adjust course in certain aspects of its war in Gaza during a half-hour phone call between Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Israel provided no public timeline for the opening but the White House said in a statement it would be intently watching for progress: “[This] must now be fully and rapidly implemented.”
The phone call, the U.S. said earlier, was spurred by the deaths of seven aid workers, including a Canadian-American citizen, killed earlier this week in Israeli strikes.
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken says that if Israel does not make the changes Washington wants to see toward strengthening protection and aid for civilians and humanitarian workers, it will change its policy toward Gaza.
“There’s been growing frustration,” with Israel’s handling of the war, White House spokesman John Kirby said Thursday.
In the coming hours and days, he said, the U.S. would look for several specific changes: new humanitarian aid crossings into Gaza, an immediate ceasefire as Israel takes new steps to protect civilians, and more movement in hostage negotiations.
This marked the first time the Biden administration has threatened publicly to use its leverage on Israel to get specific changes in Gaza, another indicator of the shifting politics of the war.
In Washington, criticism of Israel, once relegated to the fringe, has moved into the mainstream, with Biden facing particular pressure from his party’s left.
What’s less clear are the specifics of the U.S. ultimatum.
The White House had repeatedly refused to specify what it would do if unsatisfied with what it hears back from Netanyahu’s government.
For example, Kirby sidestepped the question of whether the U.S. would halt weapons transfers. He simply said the U.S. will adjust its policies, based on what Israel does next.
“What we want to see are some real changes on the Israeli side. And if we don’t see changes from their side, there’ll have to be changes from our side,” he said.
“But I won’t preview what that could look like.”
On a related note, Kirby declined to comment on news reports that purport to identify one of the reasons for a high number of civilian casualties in Gaza.
Israeli and British outlets this week reported on an artificial intelligence program, called Lavender, that the Israeli military has used to identify suspected Hamas operatives.
The list purportedly grew to 37,000 at one point — but was eventually scaled back — and those people were targeted for bombing, even if they were surrounded by civilians.
Military personnel rarely questioned the AI before approving strikes, according to the reports.
Weapons shipments
The greatest leverage the U.S. has over Israel is potentially its weapons sales.
American media recently reported the U.S has quietly delivered more than 100 weapons shipments to Israel — including thousands of munitions, bombs and small arms — since Oct. 7, on top of the two shipments totalling some $253 million US that were publicly known.
The administration has also pressed Congress to approve transfers of $18 billion US in fighter jets.
Netanyahu on Thursday said such shipments are key to finishing the war faster.
“Victory is within reach. We are very close,” he said.
Looming over all this is the Iran angle. An escalation of hostility between Israel and its nearby rival could prolong the conflict, broaden it, and potentially even further draw in the U.S.
Tehran has threatened reprisals for a recent Israeli strike that killed several of its military commanders gathered at a diplomatic compound in Syria.
Netanyahu spoke briefly about his potential reaction, should Iran strike: “Whoever harms us, or plans to harm us, we will harm them,” he said before a cabinet meeting.
It was during that same meeting that the Netanyahu war cabinet approved the new aid routes, indicating that the hardline and more nationalist elements of the government were forced to accept them.
In Washington, a progressive foreign-policy group applauded the shift in tone from Biden. It was “a step in the right direction,” said the Center for International Policy.
But it demanded more, and urged several policy actions including the use of U.S. leverage for a full ceasefire and and fully enforcing U.S. law and arms policy in aid of adequate humanitarian efforts.
“The urgent humanitarian crisis in Gaza… requires more than stern words,” it said.
And it’s not just the progressive left urging Biden to harden his line. So are more moderate lawmakers.
Richard Haass, a pillar of Washington’s centrist foreign-policy establishment, a former official in two Republican administrations, is calling for trade sanctions and controls on weapons transfers.
“At some point the words become empty,” Haass, now the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, said on MSNBC.
He said that, in the first Bush administration, the U.S. confronted Israel on its settlements in the occupied territories.
Haas said it’s time, now, to put tariffs on goods from West Bank settlements, and place conditions on U.S. weapons transfers.
