A Chapter From A Forthcoming Book:
“Essay on Hamas: The Struggle For Palestine Liberation”
By Hichem Karoui
Deciphering the Geopolitical Landscape: The Complexity of the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict and U.S. Involvement
Understanding the subtleties of geopolitical dynamics is crucial for untangling the convoluted tapestry of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the role of the United States alongside its allies in the Middle Eastern milieu. The origins of U.S. backing for Israel are profoundly rooted in an intricate mélange of historical precedents, strategic imperatives, and ideological commitments. The symbiotic rapport between these two nations has been sculpted by a confluence of democratic tenets and a mutual apprehension regarding regional security challenges. This relationship has precipitated significant military aid and a steadfast strategic partnership. However, this unwavering allegiance has ignited an impassioned debate, with detractors arguing that it exacerbates hostilities and obstructs the quest for an equitable and enduring resolution.
The United States’ involvement in diplomatic initiatives to mediate the conflict has provoked considerable contention. While the U.S. has endeavored to position itself as a pivotal actor in peace negotiations, its proven favoritism toward Israel has engendered skepticism and criticism, particularly among Palestinian advocates. Numerous analysts have scrutinized the impartiality of U.S. mediation efforts, accentuating the intrinsic barriers to establishing a fair and sustainable peace accord.
Moreover, the United States’ influential role within the United Nations—especially its readiness to exercise veto power within the Security Council—has conferred upon Israel a protective umbrella against critical resolutions and actions, thus augmenting global discord and discontent. The U.S. has adeptly leveraged its superpower status and alliances to shape international dialogue and policies concerning the conflict, illuminating the extensive reach of its influence on both regional and global platforms.
In addition, the alignment between the United States and its Gulf allies has bolstered their collective authority, enabling them to mold the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East effectively. Their shared aspirations—namely, curbing Iranian hegemony, fostering regional stability, and advancing strategic interests—have catalyzed a plethora of collaborative initiatives and partnerships, thereby steering the region’s trajectory. The scrutiny surrounding U.S. and allied involvement in regional security frameworks has intensified, particularly concerning establishing military bases and security agreements. Such actions inspire inquiries regarding their regional sovereignty and stability implications, mirroring larger debates on the efficacy of military solutions to intricate geopolitical dilemmas.
These multifaceted complexities illuminate the nuanced character of the conflict and the interwoven relationships and interests that define the region. To grasp the depth of U.S. and allied involvement necessitates an understanding of the broader geopolitical landscape and the navigation of potential pathways toward a sustainable and equitable resolution.
Furthermore, one must not overlook the domestic political currents within the United States, which significantly shape its policy inclinations toward Israel and the larger Middle East. A formidable pro-Israeli lobby exerts considerable sway over governmental decision-making and public discourse. Historically, this lobby has played a crucial role in shaping U.S. foreign policy in the region, often aligning closely with Israeli government interests. This intimate interrelationship has drawn intense scrutiny, with critics raising salient concerns about the implications of such influence on the U.S.’s ability to function as an impartial mediator and its overarching regional foreign policy objectives.
Additionally, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is inextricably linked to broader regional dynamics, including the emergence of non-state actors and transnational threats. In response, the U.S. and its allies have sought to combat these challenges through comprehensive security initiatives, intelligence sharing, and military interventions. Nonetheless, the long-term repercussions of these strategies on the conflict and regional stability remain contentious, as the area’s militarization has engendered a myriad of multifaceted ripple effects and unforeseen consequences.
Moreover, the pursuit of energy security and economic interests by the United States in the Middle East necessitates meticulous consideration. This region is replete with substantial oil and gas reserves, rendering it a linchpin in global energy markets. The United States and its allies have strategically engaged with regional actors to safeguard access to essential energy resources, influence production and distribution dynamics, and mitigate potential disruptions, thereby underscoring the intrinsic connection between economic objectives and geopolitical strategies.
A comprehensive exploration of the historical, strategic, domestic, and economic dimensions of U.S. and allied involvement in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict reveals a complex tapestry of interests, alliances, and challenges that underlie the region’s geopolitical landscape.
The Special Relationship with Israel
The United States’ role as a peace mediator in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict appears fundamentally flawed, primarily due to its robust ties with Israel and the significant sway of pro-Israel lobbying organizations such as AIPAC. This connection is perceived as a substantial obstacle to impartial mediation efforts, with some critics going so far as to label the U.S. an accomplice in Israel’s military actions, particularly those deemed as violations of international law. The weapons that are destroying Palestinian society are weapons that successive U.S. administrations have supplied to Israel while continuing to fund and equip the Netanyahu government in the midst of its military campaigns.
Historical Context and Policy Shifts
U.S. policy regarding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has transformed over the years, yet crucial elements—such as ensuring Israel’s military dominance and courting Arab nations —have shown remarkable consistency (Pappé, 2007). The emergence of the Israel lobby during the 1950s and its subsequent activities have reinforced a pro-Israel bias within U.S. foreign policy (Rossinow, 2018). This special relationship has endured for decades, with the U.S. providing substantial military and financial assistance to Israel (Gultom & Miftah, 2024), complicating the United States’ self-portrayal as a neutral party in the conflict.
Deeply anchored in historical and strategic rationales, the U.S.-Israel alliance has evolved from a basic friendship into a complex partnership, shaped by various geopolitical considerations and security crises confronting Israel. Nadav Safran chronicles this transformation, illustrating how U.S. perceptions of Israel as an essential ally in the Middle East have influenced its diplomatic and military strategies (Safran, 1978).
Organizations such as AIPAC exert profound influence over U.S. policymaking related to Israel and the broader Middle East (Ozgur, 2016; Turay, 2016). AIPAC has been characterized as “stunningly effective” in shaping U.S. foreign policy (Turay, 2016). Its clout extends beyond domestic politics, affecting international stances on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict (Bandeira, 2017). U.S. politicians often seek the backing of pro-Israel voters and financial contributors, which can significantly sway their policy decisions (Erdoğan & Habash, 2020). For instance, Donald Trump’s declaration recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital was largely seen as a maneuver to appeal to his Evangelical Christian constituency (Aswar, 2018).
Mearsheimer and Walt argue that the lobbying efforts have skewed U.S. foreign policy decidedly in favor of Israel, often at the detriment of broader strategic interests (Mearsheimer & Walt, 2006; Mearsheimer & Walt, 2008). Edward Tivnan highlights the aggressive and impactful nature of the pro-Israel lobby, asserting that it has been instrumental in guaranteeing ongoing U.S. support for Israel, regardless of the adverse implications this has for peace in the Middle East (Tivnan, 1987).
Historical Bias in Peace Efforts
Critics assert that U.S.-led peace initiatives have disproportionately favored Israeli interests. The Oslo Accords, for instance, have faced substantial criticism for not adequately addressing Palestinian rights while simultaneously permitting the continued expansion of Israeli settlements (Naqib, 2003, pp. 499–512).
Impact on U.S. Policy and Mediation
Historically, the U.S. has maintained robust support for Israel, often to the detriment of Palestinian rights. This support—encompassing military, financial, and political dimensions—has impeded the U.S.’s capacity to act as an impartial mediator (Hovhannisyan, 2023). Many observers attribute this imbalance to the formidable impact of the pro-Israel lobby (Hansen, 2008; Gries, 2015).
Perception of Bias Among Palestinians
A prevalent sentiment among Palestinians is the view that the U.S. exhibits bias toward Israel, undermining its legitimacy as a mediator in the conflict (Pratiwi et al., 2020, pp. 57–107). This perception poses a significant challenge to any prospects of a fair and just resolution to the longstanding Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Challenges in Mediation
The United States encounters significant obstacles in fulfilling its role as a mediator in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, primarily due to its deeply entrenched relationship with Israel. Yehuda Lukacs observes that during the Clinton administration, even amid favorable conditions for peace, the U.S. struggled to take decisive action, largely influenced by domestic political pressures and an inherent bias toward Israeli interests (Lukacs, 2002). An analysis by William Quandt suggests that American diplomacy concerning the Arab-Israeli conflict is profoundly shaped by domestic dynamics, particularly the roles played by Congress and Jewish-American public opinion. These factors collectively complicate the U.S.’s ability to serve as an unbiased mediator.
Clinton’s affinity for Israel and his reluctance to address Israeli policies, especially those pertaining to settlements, further exemplify the intricate challenges associated with maintaining neutrality. The interplay of various domestic influences indicates that entrenched interests can significantly impede the U.S. from fully engaging as an impartial facilitator in the peace process. Clinton’s hesitance to confront Israeli policies—such as the expansion of settlements—highlights the difficulties of achieving impartiality when domestic political considerations are intertwined with foreign policy (Lukacs, 2002). All US presidents, from Truman to Biden, Democrats and Republicans, did not deviate from this path, which places Israel above international law, as a pawn of the United States, a bully to the world, not just the Arabs.
Criticism and Consequences
Critics contend that the United States’ close relationship with Israel, coupled with the significant sway of the pro-Israel lobby, has adversely affected U.S. national interests and obstructed the peace process (Gries, 2015; Kshevitskaia, 2022). The lack of American support for even moderate Palestinian leadership under figures like Yasser Arafat has been cited as a contributing factor to the emergence of armed resistance groups and the perpetuation of conflict (Hansen, 2008).
Conclusion
While the United States has historically played a pivotal role in the Middle East peace process, its ability to act as a mediator is no longer valuable because it has lost its credibility and therefore its effectiveness. The strong ties between the United States and Israel, coupled with the widespread influence of pro-Israel lobbying organizations, complicate the United States’ ability to advocate for a balanced solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and suggest that it should be replaced by less biased international actors. Thus, a U.S. foreign policy in the region that is contingent on Israel’s favor seems doomed to failure sooner or later, ultimately undermining the possibility of a fair and credible peace initiative if U.S. mediation is relied upon.
References
Aswar, Hasbi. “The U.S. Foreign Policy under Trump Administration to Recognize Jerusalem as the State Capital of Israel.” Nation-State Journal of International Studies, 2018.
Bandeira, L. “Great Israel, Israel and Palestina.” (2017): 303-320. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54888-3_23.
Erdoğan, Ayfer, and L. Habash. “U.S. Policy Toward the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict under the Trump Administration: Continuity or Change?” Insight Turkey, 2020. Volume 22. N.1.
Gultom, Yosua Saut Marulitua, and Hafidz Zaula Miftah. “The Role of the Jewish Lobby Toward US Foreign Policy Making on the 2023 Israel-Palestine War (Case of AIPAC).”
Gries, P. “How Ideology Divides American Liberals and Conservatives over Israel.” Political Science Quarterly, 130 (2015): 51-78. https://doi.org/10.1002/POLQ.12288.
Hasanuddin Journal of Strategic and International Studies (HJSIS), 2024.
Hansen, M. “The Israel Lobby and the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process.” Sigma: Journal of Political and International Studies, 26 (2008): 2.
Hovhannisyan, A. “US POLICY TOWARDS THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION DURING THE ARAB-ISRAEL WARS IN 1967 AND 1973.” SUSh Scientific Proceedings (2023). https://doi.org/10.54151/27382559-23.1pb-96.
John, J., Mearsheimer., Stephen, M., Walt. The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. Social Science Research Network, 2006, doi: 10.2139/SSRN.891198
John, J., Mearsheimer., Stephen, M., Walt. The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 2008.
Kshevitskaia, M. A. “US – ISRAEL COOPERATION AS A PERMANENT DESTABILIZING FACTOR IN THE MIDDLE EAST.” Scientific Notes of V. I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University. Juridical science (2022). https://doi.org/10.37279/2413-1733-2021-7-3(1)-161-169.
Nadav, Safran. Israel, the embattled ally. Belknap Press; 1978.
Naqib, Fadle M. “Economic Aspects of the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: The Collapse of the Oslo Accord.” Journal of International Development 15 (2003): 499–512.
Pappé, I. “Clusters of history: US involvement in the Palestine question.” Race & Class, 48 (2007): 1 – 28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306396807073853.
Pratiwi, Fadhila Inas, Grienda Qomara, and M. Syarafi. “US Involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Solution or Problem?” 24:57–107, 2020. https://www.airitilibrary.com/Common/Click_DOI?DOI=10.6185%2fTJIA.V.202007_24(1).0002
Tivnan, Edward. The Lobby: Jewish Political Power and American Foreign Policy. Simon & Schuster, 1987.
Turay, P. “The Effect of the Israel Lobby on U.S Foreign Policy: A Case Study of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s Influence on the U.S Decision to Go to War in Iraq in 2003,” 2016.
Yehuda, Lukacs. “Peace Process: American Diplomacy and the Arab-Israeli Conflict.” Middle East Journal, 2002. Vol. 56, No. 2, pp. 347.
