BLINKEN SU BIDEN E HAMAS
Raylan Givens
Raylan Givens
Blinken confessa su Biden e Hamas. I litigi tra Stati Uniti e Israele sono stati la causa del ritiro da parte di Hamas dalla trattativa degli ostaggi
"Adesso vengono?" L'editoriale del Wall Street Journal attacca duramente il segretario di Stato americano Anthony Blinken per aver saputo in tempo reale che le sue critiche a Israele stavano impedendo un accordo per il rilascio degli ostaggi, e tuttavia hanno continuato a farlo, e che le considerazioni politiche di Biden hanno impedito un accordo. L'articolo accusa anche Biden di aver contribuito al successo di Israele nell'attaccare l'asse iraniano, anche se Biden e il suo popolo avevano sempre cercato di fermare la macchina da guerra israeliana
BLINKEN ON BIDEN AND HAMAS
Raylan Givens "Now they're coming?" The Wall Street Journal editorial sharply attacks US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken for knowing in real time that his criticism of Israel was preventing a deal to release the hostages, and yet they continued with it, and that Biden's political considerations prevented an agreement. The article also accuses Biden of credit for Israel's success in attacking the Iranian axis, even though Biden and his people had been trying to stop Israel's war machine all along. Thread belwo In an interview published Saturday in the New York Times, Secretary of State Antony Blinken outlined the main obstacle to a Gaza hostage deal: "Every time there has been a public rift between the United States and Israel and the perception that pressure is mounting on Israel, we've seen this: Hamas has backed away from agreeing to a ceasefire and the release of hostages." He is right, and the messages from Hams leader Yahya Sinwar to his negotiators, reported by the Wall Street Journal, say so. But what, then, is the accountability for the Biden administration's actions? Since the first and only hostage deal to date in November 2023, President Biden has maintained a relentless public rift, constraining Israel, beating it, threatening it, and demanding that it end its defensive war. The president has used these confrontations (with Israel) to appease his party's anti-Israeli activist base ahead of the 2024 elections, but as Mr. Blinken says, Hams has also heard the message. On November 30, 2023, Mr. Blinken set new rules for how Israel could fight—in short, Israel could not continue to fight as it had been doing until then (a fighting style) that forced Hams to make a deal. On December 12, Mr. Biden accused Israel of "indiscriminate bombing," a lie belied by evidence. The message to Israel was to "move to the next phase" (of the war) with fewer soldiers. As American pressure on Israel increased in 2024, Hams argued that there was no need to release the hostages; the US would force Israel to end the war anyway. In February, the administration pushed for the creation of a Palestinian state, created an anti-Israel sanctions regime, and put in place new arms transfers. Mr. Biden criticized Israel's war effort as "over the top" and considered Israeli settlements illegal. Where was the concern then about a "public gap with Israel" when more hostages were still alive? In March, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer called for the overthrow of the Israeli government. Mr. Biden blamed Israel for the aid problems; Vice President Kamala Harris called for an "immediate ceasefire," and the president set a "red line" that Israel must not enter Rafah, Hams's southern stronghold. Mr. Biden issued threats not in private but on CNN: "We are not going to provide the weapons and the artillery shells." He profited from it. In April, President Biden denounced Israel and demanded new concessions in the negotiations. Mr. Blinken warned that "if we don't see the changes that we need to see" in Israel's behavior, "there will be a change in our policy." At the time, we called it "the worst thing a president could do to free the hostages." Why did it take Mr. Blinken so long to reach that conclusion? We could go on for months about how Mr. Biden did everything he could to prevent Israel from defeating Hezbollah. The administration's change of tune is more telling, especially since the US election. Instead of continuing to complain about its failure to stop Israel, the Biden team has taken credit for Israel's achievements. In December, Mr. Biden, who had pushed for "de-escalation" throughout the war, boasted that he had "shifted the balance of power in the Middle East." Mr. Blinken now says, "Israel has destroyed Hams's military capabilities." National security adviser Jake Sullivan says that "Iran's main proxy in the region, Hezbollah, has been completely weakened, crushed." The Washington Post's David Ignatius, a vocal supporter of Biden's policies, wrote in his exit interview with Mr. Sullivan on December 31 that "the Biden team bet on Israel," which "began to run the table against Iran and its proxies," resulting in "a transformed Middle East." Who knew that escalation meant transformation? While the Biden team gropes for another legacy, the only positive thing he can find is that Iranian power is backing down. Never mind that this was the opposite of the administration's policy, which tried to stop Israel in every way. Let's pray that the change came in time to crush Hamas' hopes of helping the hostages
