April 9, 2024 5:51 pm ET
Many elected Democrats, responding to pressure from their left-wing supporters, have refrained from making a strong moral argument for defeating Hamas for several months now. Instead, they have found it easier to express condemnation for the toll of the conflict. However, this relentless criticism of Israel has left Democrats increasingly susceptible to external pressures. The question arises: if these politicians genuinely believe in their statements, why haven’t they taken concrete actions to support them?
Recent events provide insight into this dilemma. For instance, a video surfaced showing Senator Elizabeth Warren’s response at the Islamic Center of Boston to a question about whether Israel is committing genocide. Her initial instinct was to evade a direct answer, stating, “For me, it is far more important to say what Israel is doing is wrong.”
She went on to accuse Israel of deliberately causing suffering to children in Gaza, sparking further agitation from the audience. The crowd demanded a clear yes-or-no response, prompting Warren to suggest that legally, there might be grounds to consider it genocide, leading to applause from the audience. However, her spokesperson later attempted to clarify that Warren was referring to the ongoing legal process at the International Court of Justice, not expressing her personal views on the matter.
This incident underscores the challenges faced by politicians in navigating complex geopolitical issues while balancing the expectations of their constituents and broader diplomatic considerations.
Secondly, State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller faced inquiries regarding the U.S. stance on investigating Israel’s actions in Gaza, akin to its probe into Russia following the Ukraine invasion. Rather than dismissing the comparison outright, Miller attempted to mollify the questioner, stating, “We have ongoing assessments in place.”
Despite not conclusively determining Israel’s breach of international humanitarian law, the implication lingers: while not yet deemed war criminals, Israel remains under scrutiny, a tactic reminiscent of undermining a longstanding ally.
Additionally, Miller emphasized that merely evacuating civilians from Rafah, Hamas’s stronghold, falls short. “We have conveyed to Israel our concerns regarding the potential devastating impact of a full-scale military invasion of Rafah on civilian populations,” he remarked. This stance suggests that sparing an invasion is imperative to mitigate civilian suffering.
Furthermore, the call to action extends to the political arena, where Virginia Senator Tim Kaine advocates for withholding “bombs and other offensive weapons” capable of causing civilian casualties. Disregarding the necessity of such armaments in combating terrorists, Kaine’s proposal aligns with Representative Nancy Pelosi and 55 House Democrats’ demand to cease arms shipments to Israel. This demand persists despite ongoing attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah and threats from Iran.
In a landscape dominated by White House reproach of Israel’s actions and their purported toll on civilians, one cannot overlook the ripple effect. What emerges is a sense of betrayal hovering in the air, shaping the discourse and potentially altering diplomatic alliances.