A new journal article analyzes Israel’s campaign in the Gaza Strip and the policy choices that the United States has made to address the conflict.
With news of progress on a ceasefire deal, the outlook on an end to the war in Gaza looks more promising than it has in months. It comes in the wake of the official death toll in the Strip passing 45,000, according to local health officials, a number that is more than likely a fraction of the true devastation. And yet, even with the ongoing negotiations, dozens of civilians are being killed and injured by Israeli attacks daily.
With the massive count, and outrage on behalf of the international community, still growing, the United States continues to support Israel and its actions politically and militarily. While most world leaders backed Israel following the brutal October 7 attack by Hamas, support began to erode with the Israeli Defense Forces’ methodical destruction of Gaza. This week, Israel shuttered its embassy in Ireland in response to Irish criticism of its war on the Strip.
Despite this, President Joe Biden has stayed resolute on his material support of Israel. Domestic support began to waver, especially in the Democratic constituency. Regardless, Biden’s stance towards Israel did not change, a factor that seems to have played a role in the party’s loss in the presidential election. What are the motivations behind the administration’s willingness to keep up support for Israel?
M.T. Samuel, assistant professor of history at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, explores this question and analyzes the war in a newly published Middle East Policy article. Reflecting on the $18 billion in military aid and weapons as well as the consistent “diplomatic cover” on the international stage, Samuel offers three possible explanations for U.S. support for Israel: the belief that Israel’s purpose is to protect Jews from genocidal antisemitism; the realization of the advantages provided by the pro-Israel lobby and fear of retaliation from it; and the idea that Biden “identifies with Zionism and adheres to its core tenets.”
The scholar points to an idea that Biden presented on a visit to the occupied territories that both Israelis and Palestinians are similarly entitled to the land of Palestine due to “deep and ancient roots.” This argument is the same one that was made by British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour when he formalized the British Empire’s commitment “to Zionist settler colonialism in Palestine” in 1917.
“Therein lies the rub,” Samuel contends, “the ahistorical conviction that modern Jewry are the descendants of the ancient Hebrews and therefore maintain a superior claim to the territory, one that predates that of the Palestinians.”
The United States’ brazen support has emboldened Israel to destroy and reoccupy Gaza. The contentious support is magnified by the contradictory objectives of the Israeli government. For example, despite initial assertions that their goals were to eradicate Hamas, it has become evident that Hamas is not the sole target in Gaza. In fact, the IDF had basically destroyed the group’s operational capabilities months ago, on top of the assassinations of multiple leaders like Ismail Haniyeh, Yahya Sinwar, and Saleh al-Arouri in 2024.
The goal, Samuel argues, became to secure the release of all hostages—negotiations that Benjamin Netanyahu has derailed. As has been seen in recent months, territorial dispossession is also a primary objective, “viewed by the Israeli cabinet as more important than returning the hostages—especially because the two objectives are seen as mutually exclusive.”
Considering the terrifyingly high death toll of civilians, it has become clearer that the IDF is seeking to subject all Gazans to consequences for October 7. The quest for territorial expansion is being prioritized over the return of the hostages. And “Israel has affirmed the conclusion reached by prominent scholars, legal experts, and more than 50 countries that the mass violence it has been inflicting on Gaza represents a violation of the UN Genocide Convention.”
Looking ahead, Netanyahu’s coalition will likely hold until the next elections in 2026. Until then, Israel’s ultimate goals appear to be to annex Gaza and the West Bank and obtain international recognition over its right to the territories. Donald Trump does not appear likely to prevent this from happening, and could even grant recognition. It remains unclear if the international community will act in response. “The Palestinians, once more, stand alone.”
Among the major takeaways readers can find in M.T. Samuel’s Middle East Policy article, “The Israel-Hamas War One Year Later: Mass Violence and Palestinian Dispossession”:
- President Joe Biden’s unwavering assistance to Israel has continued despite violations of international law and international arrest warrants issued for Israeli leaders.
- The support has left the United States isolated in the international community.
- While most world leaders backed Israel following the October 7 attacks, this support began to erode as the IDF’s destruction of Gaza continued.
- Eventually, support for Israel began to waver in the U.S. as well, especially within the Democratic Party. Yet, Biden continued to support Israel, a factor that may have played a role in the party’s loss in the recent election.
- Three explanations have been offered: Biden believes that Israel’s purpose is to protect Jews from genocidal antisemitism; he realizes the advantages provided by pro-Israel organizations and fears their retaliation; and he identifies with and believes in the tenets of Zionism.
- Biden has expressed understanding of the cause of Palestinian recognition on a visit to the occupied West Bank
- He compared it to his own Irish roots in their struggle against British colonialism and expressed support for a two-state solution.
- In doing so, he also asserted the belief in a historical Jewish claim to the territory, the same argument made by British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour when he recognized Zionism’s territorial claim in 1917.
- This belief holds inherent contradictions laid out in the U.S. King-Crane Commission in 1919, primarily around the legitimacy of the claim and the enforcement of its terms.
- The United States’ support has emboldened Israel to destroy and reoccupy Gaza. At the same time, the stated objectives of the IDF seem to differ from their actual ones.
- Hamas is not seen as the sole target in Gaza.
- Israel seeks to maintain control in the Strip past the end of the fighting.
- Territorial expansion is being prioritized over the return of the hostages.
- Civilians have been removed from nearly one-third of Gaza and large swaths of the West Bank.
- Netanyahu fired former defense minister Yoav Gallant partly on the basis of Gallant’s “objection to ‘abandoning the captives’ just so Netanyahu could satisfy his [Netanyahu’s] ‘desire to stay there.’”
- Israel has “affirmed the conclusion reached by” scholars, lawyers, and states that it is in violation of international laws regarding genocidal acts, emphasized by the arrest warrants for its leaders issued by the International Criminal Court in November.
- In its similarities to colonialism in states around the world, “the Palestinian struggle for survival, self-determination, and national independence ought to be seen as part of a global struggle for Indigenous liberation.”
- Netanyahu’s coalition looks likely to hold until the next Knesset elections in October 2026.
- Israel’s primary goals are to annex Gaza and the West Bank with international recognition over its right to the territories.
- Incoming U.S. President Donald Trump will likely not prevent this from happening and may even grant recognition.
- Much of the international community is still unclear on its actions and even the ICC warrants
You can read “The Israel-Hamas War One Year Later: Mass Violence and Palestinian Dispossession” by M.T. Samuel in Middle East Policy’s special issue Israel’s Wars.