Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wants a war with Iran, as he clearly laid out in his address to the U.S. Congress last month. He returned to Israel emboldened to carry out that goal, seemingly certain of U.S. support—ordering the killing of a top Hamas official on Iranian soil just seven days later.
Following Israel’s July 31 assassination of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken quickly asserted that Washington was “not aware of or involved in” the military operation. Yet given the high level of coordination, particularly intelligence sharing, between the United States and Israel, speculation is rife that the U.S. government was involved or at least condoned the action—as Iranian officials have suggested.
This perception is particularly widespread in the Middle East, which is still reeling from the images of U.S. legislators applauding Netanyahu, a man accused of war crimes in Gaza. Merely the perception of U.S. involvement in the assassination has an escalatory effect. This is not in the interests of the United States and threatens the American people.
The assassination of Haniyeh in Tehran is not only an attempt to draw Iran and the United States into a war; it is also a sure-fire way to destroy cease-fire negotiations. Haniyeh, as the head of Hamas’s political wing based in Qatar, was one of the leading figures reportedly attempting to get concessions from Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader on the ground in Gaza.
Netanyahu rejects a two-state solution and instead seeks a perpetually inflamed Middle East enabling him to finish the ethnic cleansing of Gaza and annexation of the West Bank—and the U.S. government is letting the flames spread.
The Biden administration is well aware of the dangers Netanyahu poses. Yet instead of taking a firm line, using diplomatic leverage, such as military assistance, to rein these continuous escalations in, it continues to behave in a fearful and cowardly way—allowing an extremist foreign leader to determine whether the United States gets pulled into yet another disastrous war.
Washington is walking into this conflagration with its eyes wide open. As an 18-year veteran of the foreign service and a newcomer to the civil service, we fear that the damage to U.S. national security and diplomacy could be far worse than anything we’ve seen in recent history, including the global war on terrorism and the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Experts inside the State Department have been warning the administration for months that unconditional support for Israel was both a morally bankrupt decision and one that directly contradicted U.S. interests in the region. Yet we and our colleagues were sidelined and silenced, and now the United States is on the brink of being drawn into a wider war that does not serve the interests of American people.
Since Israel launched its full-scale assault following Hamas’s terrorist attack on Oct. 7, 2023, commentators have asked whether senior U.S. officials have known what is happening in Gaza. The question implies that if they were watching the horrors that flooded social media, they would have to insist that Israel change its behavior or else withdraw U.S. support. Yet, as State Department spokesperson for the Middle East and North Africa region, Hala sent these images and videos to their inboxes every day: The State Department cannot claim it was unaware of what Israel, with U.S. arms, was doing to the civilian population of Gaza.
In April, in opposition to the Biden administration’s Gaza policy, Hala resigned from her latest assignment at the U.S. Consulate in Dubai. In March, Annelle resigned from the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor in protest of the Biden administration’s unconditional support for Israeli military operations in Gaza.
Based on our experiences, the State Department is willfully ignoring the fundamental shifts occurring in the region as a result of unconditional U.S. support for Israel. Far too many people in the U.S. government are enabling a policy they recognize is wrong and illegal. This erroneous and dangerous decision-making is coming from the top and sending the message to all those below to fall in line or risk career consequences.
Biden, Blinken, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, and White House Middle East coordinator Brett McGurk seem to think the United States can pursue this policy and face few long-term consequences, when in fact irreversible damage has been done and we are now on the brink of an outbreak of violence across the region. This is what Netanyahu seeks, with the support of more American boots on the ground in the Middle East.
By continuing to fund, arm, and defend Israel’s attacks on civilians in Gaza and other gross human rights violations, such as the obstruction of food, clean water, and medicine into Gaza, the Biden administration has destroyed U.S. credibility and gravely increased the national security threat to the United States. U.S. complicity is putting a target on the backs of U.S. diplomats and service members for potential retaliation, while it increasingly destabilizes the Middle East and North Africa.
Indeed, Arab publics have been protesting for months. July 26 marked the 42nd consecutive week of Moroccans protesting Israel’s assault on Gaza. More than 4,000 miles away, protesters again took to the streets in Muscat, Oman, in support of Palestinians. Jordan has even more intense scenes of mass protests. This is alarming: Morocco and Jordan both have normalized relations with Israel, and until last October, public protest in Oman was exceedingly rare.
In October, the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad was forced to evacuate some personnel due to attacks related to the Gaza conflict. In January, three U.S. service members were killed at Tower 22 in Jordan near the Syrian border in response to U.S. support of Israel. Now, after seven months of relative calm, Iran-backed militias are again targeting U.S. troops. On July 25 and 26, militias launched rockets at U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria. On Aug. 5, rockets injured U.S. service members at a military base in Iraq.
U.S. intelligence officials have highlighted such threats for months. FBI Director Christopher Wray expressed concerns in October about possible threats to the United States, saying that groups such as al Qaeda, the Islamic State, and Hezbollah were calling for attacks. In March, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines described a “generational impact on terrorism.” As of July, terrorist groups are using Gaza as a recruitment tool, according to the head of the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research.
Against this backdrop, State Department officials found it increasingly impossible to try to advance other aspects of U.S. policy, such as advocating for human rights. When meeting with members of civil society from North Africa, for example, department representatives would ask about the ways their governments were cracking down on fundamental freedoms. But these individuals would instead want to talk about Gaza and what the United States was enabling there.
State officials could only offer half-hearted assurances that the U.S. government was committed to cease-fire negotiations, a fiction belied by Biden’s dogged refusal to impose consequences on Israel, despite Netanyahu repeatedly rejecting cease-fire proposals. Similarly, when the State Department would ask representatives of Arab governments about political prisoners or restrictions on journalists, they would immediately respond with some version of, “How can you criticize us? Look at what you are doing in Gaza!” The Biden administration claimed that human rights would be central to its foreign policy; instead, it has destroyed U.S. diplomats’ ability to advocate for human rights.
The State Department has acknowledged this privately. A recently leaked internal document demonstrates that senior leaders at the department are aware that U.S. policy is irrevocably damaging U.S. credibility in the Middle East. Yet even though senior State Department officials received daily reports on Gaza and conceded the damage that unconditional U.S. support for Israel was doing to the United States’ standing in the region, their response was not to push back on the policy but rather enable it.
For example, in the role of spokesperson, Hala was repeatedly pressured to go out on Arab media and promote the policy, no matter the negative ramifications for the United States. She refused, not only because she felt it was morally wrong and a violation of U.S. and international law but also because it was causing intense backlash against the United States. As the conflict worsened, Hala observed an unprecedented rise in anti-American sentiment throughout the region, something she reported back to Washington with grave alarm. Even so-called liberal Arabs were disgusted by U.S. double standards. Yet the same abysmal talking points continued to be generated, and key policymakers refused to change tack.
Now, in the aftermath of Israel’s assassination of Haniyeh on Iranian soil and the resulting sabotage of Gaza cease-fire negotiations, everything could get much worse for the region and the United States. A wider war with Hezbollah, the Houthis, and a potential direct confrontation with Iran would be catastrophic, yet it would help Netanyahu’s political survival.
Washington can still choose another path forward—one that rejects continuous violence, indiscriminate killings of innocent civilians, and a cycle of revenge.
To prevent further escalation and make the prospect for diplomacy and peace a reality, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris needs to seek an end to the carnage and send a clear signal that the United States will not give unconditional support to an Israeli war against Hezbollah and Iran. She must insist on diplomacy and in her current role as vice president pressure the administration to avoid regional war. There may not be anything left of Gaza to save in six months’ time, and that is what Netanyahu is betting on.
Harris can correct course by insisting on the application of U.S. laws consistently and fairly when it comes to arms transfers. Applying U.S. laws and regulations (which the administration is currently in violation of) would prompt a conditioning of U.S. military aid to Israel in line with the Leahy laws, the Arms Export Control Act, and the Foreign Assistance Act. Based on its repeated, systematic, documented gross human rights violations and obstruction of U.S. humanitarian assistance, Israel is no longer eligible to receive U.S. security assistance.
Harris can make clear that she would use U.S. leverage to pressure Netanyahu to accept the cease-fire agreement. This would also enable Qatar and Egypt to pressure Hamas to make concessions and accept the deal, which it had previously accepted. Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iran have all stated previously that they would not attack if Israel ended the violence and allowed aid into Gaza.
By making her stance clear now and taking concrete actions to insist on the application of U.S. laws, Harris would demonstrate her commitment to upholding the view of a majority of Americans who oppose Biden’s unconditional support for Israel and oppose sending U.S. troops to defend Israel from the consequences of its aggression. Her stance could also force Netanyahu to avoid further provocations.
Such a move would undermine extremists on all sides. Unfortunately, this cannot wait until November. If she does not act now, she risks U.S. national security and the outbreak of a catastrophic war in the Middle East that the United States would inevitably get dragged into.
By taking action now, in line with U.S. laws, Harris would strengthen the Democratic Party’s base and potentially bring back uncommitted and youth voters—without whom she could very well lose the election.