As international tensions flare between Israel and Hamas, the White House finds itself grappling with internal divisions within President Biden’s own staff over how to respond to the escalating violence in Gaza.
The divergent views among the diplomatic, security, and intelligence aides have emerged since early May when the White House issued a written statement of “concern” over the mounting death toll. Echoing the words of United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, the statement stressed the need for de-escalation and acknowledged Palestinian human rights and international legal obligations.
The Trump administration’s stance of unequivocal support for Israel, an approach adopted by Democratic and Republican presidents alike, has come under scrutiny, with some advisers arguing for a more balanced and humanitarian-focused approach, while others believe that Israel must be given breathing room to protect itself from rocket fire from Hamas.
On one side of the divide, there are those such as Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who declared at an event in Michigan this week that “no country can accept rockets raining down on its people, on its cities” and who has sought to broker a ceasefire between the two sides. On the other side, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki recently took to Twitter to note that “we remain deeply concerned about the loss of life” in the conflict, a position echoed by White House Deputy National Security Advisor Elizabeth Hill.
Adding further debate to the mix is White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, who stated recently that the Biden administration is “committed to a two-state solution that allows the Israelis and Palestinians to live side by side in peace and security.” Sullivan’s comments have been met with both criticism and praise.
As Biden himself stated in an address this week, “It’s important that they [Israel and the Palestinians] both have an interest in stopping the violence and finding a way to a more sustainable peace.” With internal divisions of opinion within his own team, the president is left with the task of navigating a way forward on this complex and crucial issue.
As international tensions flare between Israel and Hamas, the White House finds itself grappling with internal divisions within President Biden’s own staff over how to respond to the escalating violence in Gaza.
The divergent views among the diplomatic, security, and intelligence aides have emerged since early May when the White House issued a written statement of “concern” over the mounting death toll. Echoing the words of United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, the statement stressed the need for de-escalation and acknowledged Palestinian human rights and international legal obligations.
The Trump administration’s stance of unequivocal support for Israel, an approach adopted by Democratic and Republican presidents alike, has come under scrutiny, with some advisers arguing for a more balanced and humanitarian-focused approach, while others believe that Israel must be given breathing room to protect itself from rocket fire from Hamas.
On one side of the divide, there are those such as Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who declared at an event in Michigan this week that “no country can accept rockets raining down on its people, on its cities” and who has sought to broker a ceasefire between the two sides. On the other side, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki recently took to Twitter to note that “we remain deeply concerned about the loss of life” in the conflict, a position echoed by White House Deputy National Security Advisor Elizabeth Hill.
Adding further debate to the mix is White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, who stated recently that the Biden administration is “committed to a two-state solution that allows the Israelis and Palestinians to live side by side in peace and security.” Sullivan’s comments have been met with both criticism and praise.
As Biden himself stated in an address this week, “It’s important that they [Israel and the Palestinians] both have an interest in stopping the violence and finding a way to a more sustainable peace.” With internal divisions of opinion within his own team, the president is left with the task of navigating a way forward on this complex and crucial issue.
