5 Reasons Why an Immediate Ceasefire is in American Interests
An immediate halt to the fighting in Israel and Gaza would benefit the United States
I’m not one of those reflexively anti-Clinton people. Even though I took to the streets to protest against the Iraq war that Hillary Clinton initially supported, I voted for her — twice! — and think she’s made some important contributions to American civic life. I’ve also seen first-hand the positive impact that the Clinton Foundation has made around the world.
But the former Secretary of State is wrong about the propriety of an immediate ceasefire in the Israel-Palestine conflict. In an essay in The Atlantic, she argues against a ceasefire because doing so would leave Hamas—or at least its remnants—in power. This echoes the position of the Biden administration, which has consistently rejected the notion of a ceasefire in favor of more limited “humanitarian pauses.”
Here are five reasons why this position is inimical to American interests — and why the Biden administration ought to press for an immediate and enduring ceasefire.
1) The Biden administration's rejection of a ceasefire feeds the dynamics of regional escalation that the administration is ostensibly seeking to avoid. For reasons that seem odd to me, major media outlets are not making a big deal out of the fact that the United States and Iranian proxies have been in hot conflict nearly every day since October 7. There have been some 50 attacks on American bases in Iraq and Syria. The US has retaliated in kind against Iran-linked targets in the region. American soldiers have been injured, and it could be only a matter of time until there’s a mistake or miscalculation that leads to some sort of mass casualty event. So long as the conflict continues in Gaza, the risks that the United States gets drawn into another war in the Middle East grows greater by the day.
2) Everything we've seen so far suggests that there is a tentative deal to be struck that would include the release of hostages to a more enduring ceasefire. There's no contradiction between freeing the hostages and a ceasefire. Just the opposite: a ceasefire implies the release of hostages.
3) America’s rejection of a ceasefire at the UN is deeply unpopular and it is not in American interests to be internationally isolated. On October 27th, 120 countries endorsed a humanitarian truce. The United States was one of just 14 countries to oppose. At the Security Council, the US cast a lone veto to block a resolution calling for a ceasefire. Other countries may be able to compartmentalize this issue for the time being, but the longer this goes on, the harder it will be for the United States to make progress on other key foreign policy priorities.
4) Domestically, a ceasefire would certainly lower the temperature in the United States, particularly in left-of-center circles. This conflict has exposed and exacerbated fissures in the same political coalition that must mobilize one year from now to prevent a slide towards authoritarianism. The risk of democratic backsliding in the United States is suddenly acute — and so long as the conflict in Israel and Palestine is top of mind, it may suppress turnout in a tight election on which the future of American democracy hinges.
5) As a matter of principle, the United States should oppose the indiscriminate killing and immiseration of civilians everywhere. Today, that includes Palestinians trapped in Gaza. Israel does not seem able to discriminate between combatant and noncombatant. The destruction of Hamas may be a worthy goal, but little thus far suggests that Israel is able to accomplish that goal without committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. The ends do not justify the means, at least in the kind of rules-based international order so often invoked by the Biden administration.
A few other things
The podcast episode this week is a good one! It takes a look at the first nuclear security and arms control talks between the United States and China since 2019, which happened last week. Scholar Rachel Elizabeth Whitlark explains the significance of this diplomatic opening ahead of the Biden-Xi meeting in San Francisco. Freely available here.
I got a batch of lovely vinyl Global Dispatches stickers in the mail. If you are a paid subscriber, reply to this email with your address and I’ll send you one.
I’ll be at the Halifax International Security Forum this weekend. If you’ll be attending, come say hi! I always find this conference valuable and plan to do some podcast interviews on site.