President Biden and other senior U.S. officials are becoming increasingly frustrated with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his rejection of most of the administration's recent requests related to the war in Gaza, four U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the issue told Axios.
Why it matters: Since the Oct. 7 Hamas attack 100 days ago, Biden has given Israel his full backing, with unprecedented military and diplomatic support, even while taking a political hit from part of his base in an election year. That support has largely continued publicly, but behind the scenes, there are growing signs that Biden is losing his patience, the U.S. officials said.
- "The situation sucks and we are stuck. The president's patience is running out," one U.S. official told Axios.
- "At every juncture, Netanyahu has given Biden the finger," Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who has been in close contact with U.S. officials about the war, told Axios. "They are pleading with the Netanyahu coalition, but getting slapped in the face over and over again."
Behind the scenes: Biden hasn't spoken to Netanyahu in the 20 days since a tense Dec. 23 call, which a frustrated Biden ended with the words: "This conversation is over." They had spoken almost every other day in the first two months of the war.
- Before Biden hung up, Netanyahu had rejected his request that Israel release the Palestinian tax revenues it's withholding.
- National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby tried to downplay the decrease in communication, telling reporters on Wednesday that "it doesn't say anything" about the state of the relationship.
- But more and more signs of irritation are emerging. "There is immense frustration," a U.S. official said.
Its fully within his power to pull 100% of the money Israel receives from the US and cut off all access to weapons. He has chosen not to.
It sure it. But then, the most powerful kingmaker in the US is AIPAC, if they withdraw their support of Biden, he will struggle in the presidential race.
Then the risk of a xenophobic wannabe dictator getting elected is put on the otherside of the scale.
So if you look at this from a purely US point of view. The tradeoff is brown people half a world away die, vs the US becoming trumplandia with all the vengeance he has promised to bestow on his political rivals.
So if it was your choice, what would you chose?
Edit to clarify: yes it's bizarre US allows PACs, corporations should not be treated as people, the situation is FUBAR.
Almost like money needs to get taken out of politics but not like those who use it to keep their people in power will let that happen
Our views align on the solution and the hurdles.
It saddens me that there is no young version of Senator Sanders, he would be good for the US.
Money will never be taken out of politics. It's the fundamental motivation for politics. No one is out there arguing for anything other than money. If you ask anyone if they want to be ecological and ethical they will say they are being so.
Now ask if the consequences is their livelihood and changing what they know. They will fight tooth and nail.
We have a fight based on two sides. But don't think it's only morally based. Both sides have financial consequences they are considering while fighting.
I vote for no one needlessly dying anywhere.
If Trump wins a lot of people will die, just like last time.
Sure, I would too if it where in the table as an option. But alas, it seems it is not. I would venture a guess to say that the Biden administration would also take that option if it where available... But it seems to be a quagmire of unreasonable actors.
Biden’s approval rating is 33%. AIPAC is of no consequence here - no incumbent in the history of US Federal elections has ever won with such abysmal polls in an election year. Not once, ever. Biden isn’t going to magically make history here, and his ego telling him he has to do 2 terms instead of allowing for a primary election so democracy can play out is the reason why.
Then he has the audacity to claim democracy is on the line this year. It’s already gone, America is just in denial about it.
Yeah me too
The only saving grace is that Trump is also a uniquely unpopular political figure.
But his opponent is also unprecedentedly unpopular, so we're basically in uncharted electoral territory such that the past isn't necessarily a good guide to the future.
Anyone who says they know how this all plays out is either a liar or in denial.
Can’t expect them to fight their esteemed colleagues on the other side of the aisle in Washington for things like the basic human decency of healthcare for our people, or to win an election. But if there’s one thing everyone in DC can agree on, it’s that everything wrong is the fault of the leftists! (This is of course despite leftists having virtually 0 power in this regressive, conservative capitalist dystopia in which we live).
People are going to look back in AIPAC and wonder... how AI got a political action committee before chatgtp 6.0 passed the Turning test.
Israel wasn't popular with the other countries in the region before October, most of it's neighbors have called for it's destruction, US support is basically what keeps them in check.
Israel is not popular in the region BECAUSE of the US.
False. Israel isn't popular in the region because of israel.
Israel is not popular in the region because the others are extremely antisemitic. Let's stop pretending like the others are saints, please?
An old Zionist lie, conflate opposition to zionism with antisemitism
Nah the Houthis do seem pretty antisemitic, straight up.
You are trying to conflate antisemitism with being antizionist, perpetuating the Zionist lie
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slogan_of_the_Houthi_movement
"God Is the Greatest, Death to America, Death to Israel, A Curse Upon the Jews, Victory to Islam"
Why exactly do they explicitly refer to Israel and "the Jews" separately if their issue is with Zionist Israel?
And then Al-Houthi had this to say through his fascicles: “Arab countries and all Islamic countries will not be safe from Jews except through their eradication and the elimination of their entity.”
You know what helps Zionists? Not condemning actual antisemitism, because it lets them continue the lie that anti Zionism is the same as anti semitism.
Unless, of course, you have a good explanation for how wishing a curse on Jews, distinctly from death to Israel, isn't antisemitic?
A new Antisemitic lie, conflate Jewish people's desire to exist with Zionism.
Im no historian but i figured Israel wasn't popular in the region because the country of irael used to be the country of Palestine until another country decided to put israel there. I bet Egypt hated having a lot of its territory held for a long time as well after that one war but like i said I'm no history doctor
There's never been a country of Palestine, but you're right about not being a historian.....
damn, really? Why did something like a million people get displaced when israels borders for drawn in 1950 or whatever? I can't remember the details. Why did all those people get forced from their homes?
Because they chose war rather than the deal the ruling power offered is the short answer.
Many of those people also left willingly at the direction of the Arab Nations surrounding Israel with the understanding they'd get to return after Israel lost the war. That obviously didn't happen because Israel won the wars.
Many were also just kicked out because this new nation had just been attacked and they wanted control over the disputed lands that they had won. It's not a clean situation but nation building rarely is.
Nearly one million Jews were also kicked out of their homes in the surrounding Arab Nations.
Im really going to have to look this up again and knock off the rust. Wasn't the newly created state of Israel supposed to be ethnically Jewish? Was this not originally the intent? Could anyone live there? When did that change? I do remember the countries previously bordering the british territory almost immediately attacked once it declared itself a state, (like only days/weeks later) maybe im thinking of all the people fleeing the battle. There was a war at its inception then israel got a little pieces of egypt, syria and (i think) lebanon that they've still got.
I know there was immigration of jews to Israel from the Arab states pretty soon after its creation. Did the Arab states kick Jews out like the us did with Japanese during ww2? Which nation did it first? Man there's too much shit to look at
The goal of Israel was a Jewish homeland but it's never been only for Jews. Arabs have always lived there and always will. The Arab population of Israel has grown faster than the Jewish one too.
Look up Jewish exodus of the Arab world, the wiki is pretty informative. The war of independence would be key words to lead to information about the attacks when they were first granted nationhood.
Get multiple sources and double check those sources. lots of newly invented stories are flying around these days.
Israel isn't a perfect democracy but it's far and away the best option for the citizens in the region and they're not genocidal monsters although I'm sure some of them are horrid people, it seems you can't form a government without some of those making a part of it.
More like the US is not popular in the region because of Israel.
Israel isn't popular because the region wants a Pan Arabian state and having a Jewish one right in the middle doesn't allow them the caliphate they're going for.
That's not how government appropriations work.
The money to Israel is NOT appropriations, it comes from the Foreign Military Financing Fund which is 100% allocated by the President. The President decides who and how much of that money goes to what counties and organizations.
That's a very limited part of the support. Most of the money is allocated as I understand by Congress either directly to Israel, allocated to DoD or State Dept. who the. use their own budgets and programs to provide diplomatic and military support, sometimes jointly, of which Congress has oversight, and then through a number of statutory procedures, including the one you cited, which is basically lend-lease financing and grants. I don't know the details of how it works but the President absolutely does not do as you've described. Even the limited authorizations and limited funding controlled by the White House has statutory procedures.