Fire and Firefighter: Can the United States hold back Israel after Iran's attack? | Joe Biden News

Washington, DC The response from US President Joe Biden's administration to Iran's historic missile and drone attack on Israel was two-fold: Washington reiterated its commitment to always stand with its ally at all times. ordeal, Israel, while also appealing to the government of the Israeli Prime Minister. Benjamin Netanyahu should not take further steps that could drag the region into a wider war.

The coming days will show whether these two options are compatible, or whether the two governments' priorities are on a collision course, analysts told Al Jazeera.

In the short term, the Iranian attack of April 13 and 14 constitutes a coup d'état both for Israel and for its supporters in the United States. From their perspective, it offers renewed justification for military support for Israel while weakening global attention to alleged abuses in Gaza during seven months of war, according to Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, based in Washington.

But Netanyahu's defiance of calls for U.S. restraint could further hamstring the Biden administration over its political and ideological commitments to Israel, potentially drawing Washington into a broader war, he added.

Biden told Israelis to consider this a victory and stop there, Parsi told Al Jazeera. While this is helpful, it is by no means loud and clear enough given Netanyahu's systematic disregard for Biden's advice and warnings in private over the past seven months.

This is a moment, as we stare into the abyss of the region, that Biden needs to be much clearer and much stronger in drawing a red line so that Israel and Netanyahu do not drag the entire region into war .

Operation True Promise

Biden cut short a weekend and returned to Washington, D.C., as Iran launched hundreds of drones and missiles toward Israel on Saturday in what Tehran dubbed Operation True Promise.

It was the first time Iran had directly attacked Israel, and Iranian officials said it was a deterrent. It was a direct response to an April 1 Israeli strike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria, that killed eight people, including two Iranian generals, and was widely condemned for violating diplomatic norms. According to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, countries' embassies are considered their sovereign territory: legally, the bombing of the Iranian diplomatic mission in Syria amounted to an attack on Iranian soil.

But several analysts have suggested that Tehran's attacks were potentially intended to serve as a signal to Washington. The United States and Israel said almost all of the more than 300 launches were intercepted, with only minor damage reported. In this way, the attack allowed Tehran to carry out what many saw as an inevitable response to the Israeli attack on its consulate, while removing some of the variables that might come from a more surprise attack or by forces by force. proxy, and which in turn could potentially trigger a less controllable conflict, according to Khalil Jahshan, executive director of the Arab Center in Washington DC.

I am not inclined towards conspiracy, but I have the feeling that there has been some coordination between the parties on this over the last few days, Jahshan told Al Jazeera, stressing that this would have come via third parties In the region.

Much information has been shared between Tehran and Washington. SO [the attack] It wasn't a surprise. It was a kind of political theater in other ways.

On Sunday, the Reuters news agency, citing a Biden administration official, reported that the United States had contacts with Iran through Swiss intermediaries before and after the attack. However, the official denied that Iran had given any notification before the launches, which he said were aimed at destruction and casualties.

Fire and firefighter

Following the attack, the Iranian mission to the UN reported that there were no further plans for retaliation against Israel, saying in a statement that the matter could be considered settled.

However, if the Israeli regime makes another mistake, Iran's response will be considerably harsher, he added, warning the United States to stay away.

For their part, senior U.S. and Israeli officials spent the hours following the attack on a series of calls, with Biden reportedly telling Netanyahu that Washington would not support a subsequent Israeli strike against Iran. Biden emphasized the strength Israel had shown in defending itself against the attack, administration officials said, while seeking to deescalate further fighting.

In this, the Biden administration's response embodies a microcosm of its overall approach since October 7, according to Brian Finucane, senior adviser for the US program at Crisis Group.

This approach involves playing the role of both arsonist and fireman in Israel-Palestine and the wider Middle East, he said.

The Biden administration has continued to provide material and political support to Israel in the Gaza war, even as it has faced increasing domestic pressure to condition aid amid widespread allegations of Israeli violations in the enclave. At least 33,729 Palestinians have been killed since the start of the war, according to Gaza authorities.

The administration has been criticized for exerting mostly rhetorical pressure on Netanyahu's government in recent weeks, while refusing to use material leverage. However, an April 1 Israeli strike in Gaza, which killed seven World Central Kitchen aid workers, including citizens of the United States and its allies, saw the Biden administration take its toughest stance yet against Israel.

Finucane nevertheless explained that American weapons have allowed Israel to carry out strikes throughout the region, arguably in violation of American law, for years.

Israeli strikes in Syria, including the one on Damascus on April 1 that precipitated this particular crisis, were carried out with warplanes supplied by the United States, he said, stressing that their use could violate the Arms Export Control Act, which states that U.S. weapons should only be used in self-defense.

Joshua Landis, director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, highlighted the opposition of the United States, the United Kingdom and France to a declaration by the United Nations Security Council in early April which would have condemned the Israeli strike on the Iranian consulate, which would have described this situation as a progressive violation of normal diplomatic rules.

The United States said it was time to stop this escalation, Landis told Al Jazeera. But in fact, he added fuel to the fire by siding with Israel so unilaterally and violating international norms.

Will Netanyahu listen?

The current situation leaves the next decision entirely in Israel's hands, several analysts told Al Jazeera.

Netanyahu and other Israeli officials have not yet indicated whether and how they would respond, although some in the government have called for a strong response.

I think it's very clear that Washington and Tehran are, ironically, closer in their goal. Both do not want escalation for their own reasons, Firas Maksad, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told Al Jazeera.

Netanyahu is the wild card here. And the danger for the United States is that [Israel] If they ignore their calls for calm, they could find themselves drawn into and forced to come to Israel's aid, perhaps reluctantly, he said.

In both the United States and Israel, domestic politics will likely guide what happens next, according to Andreas Krieg, a senior lecturer at the School of Security Studies at Kings College London.

Netanyahu urgently needs a victory narrative; he urgently needs to project some kind of strength over his own voters, Krieg told Al Jazeera.

So that makes him the candidate most likely to go further, he said. He has certainly always been very risk-averse when it comes to his political survival. It is therefore not really a question of Israel's security interests but of its own political survival.

The Israeli prime minister has been the target of regular and large protests in Israel, with many calling for his resignation. Several analysts have suggested that the best way for Netanyahu to stay in power is to continue the war.

Meanwhile, the Iranian attack has already reinvigorated efforts to provide more military aid to Israel, after weeks of increasing pressure on the Biden administration to impose conditions on assistance to its ally. Middle East. On Sunday, US House Speaker Mike Johnson said he would bring a vote on additional aid to Israel to the chamber later this week.

[The attack] changed the narrative. Today we are talking about an unprecedented attack by Iran against Israel, but we are not talking about starving children in Gaza, said Crisis Group's Finucane. We are not talking about the drone strikes against aid workers in Gaza, which were the subject of discussion a week ago.

And while political pressure will continue on Biden to push for an end to the war, Netanyahu is also aware that Biden likely sees the political costs of breaking with Israel as even higher in an election year , added Landis of the University of Oklahoma.

In the end, what comes out is the bad news: that Israel has prepared for a very long war in Gaza, he said.

Due to long-standing US policy, the Jahshan Arab Center said it could not envision a scenario in which Biden would break with Netanyahu, whatever course of action the Israeli leader takes and whatever his regional implications.

Based on my personal knowledge of [Biden] Having observed and dealt with him for decades, I believe he is not capable of taking a disagreement with Israel to its ultimate conclusion, he said.

Perhaps more verbosity and doublespeak, but a serious policy change? I don't foresee this.

Sources 1/ https://Google.com/ 2/ https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/14/israels-past-defiance-in-spotlight-as-us-calls-for-iran-attack-restraint The mention sources can contact us to remove/changing this article

What Are The Main Benefits Of Comparing Car Insurance Quotes Online

LOS ANGELES, CA / ACCESSWIRE / June 24, 2020, / Compare-autoinsurance.Org has launched a new blog post that presents the main benefits of comparing multiple car insurance quotes. For more info and free online quotes, please visit https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/the-advantages-of-comparing-prices-with-car-insurance-quotes-online/ The modern society has numerous technological advantages. One important advantage is the speed at which information is sent and received. With the help of the internet, the shopping habits of many persons have drastically changed. The car insurance industry hasn't remained untouched by these changes. On the internet, drivers can compare insurance prices and find out which sellers have the best offers. View photos The advantages of comparing online car insurance quotes are the following: Online quotes can be obtained from anywhere and at any time. Unlike physical insurance agencies, websites don't have a specific schedule and they are available at any time. Drivers that have busy working schedules, can compare quotes from anywhere and at any time, even at midnight. Multiple choices. Almost all insurance providers, no matter if they are well-known brands or just local insurers, have an online presence. Online quotes will allow policyholders the chance to discover multiple insurance companies and check their prices. Drivers are no longer required to get quotes from just a few known insurance companies. Also, local and regional insurers can provide lower insurance rates for the same services. Accurate insurance estimates. Online quotes can only be accurate if the customers provide accurate and real info about their car models and driving history. Lying about past driving incidents can make the price estimates to be lower, but when dealing with an insurance company lying to them is useless. Usually, insurance companies will do research about a potential customer before granting him coverage. Online quotes can be sorted easily. Although drivers are recommended to not choose a policy just based on its price, drivers can easily sort quotes by insurance price. Using brokerage websites will allow drivers to get quotes from multiple insurers, thus making the comparison faster and easier. For additional info, money-saving tips, and free car insurance quotes, visit https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/ Compare-autoinsurance.Org is an online provider of life, home, health, and auto insurance quotes. This website is unique because it does not simply stick to one kind of insurance provider, but brings the clients the best deals from many different online insurance carriers. In this way, clients have access to offers from multiple carriers all in one place: this website. On this site, customers have access to quotes for insurance plans from various agencies, such as local or nationwide agencies, brand names insurance companies, etc. "Online quotes can easily help drivers obtain better car insurance deals. All they have to do is to complete an online form with accurate and real info, then compare prices", said Russell Rabichev, Marketing Director of Internet Marketing Company. CONTACT: Company Name: Internet Marketing CompanyPerson for contact Name: Gurgu CPhone Number: (818) 359-3898Email: [email protected]: https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/ SOURCE: Compare-autoinsurance.Org View source version on accesswire.Com:https://www.Accesswire.Com/595055/What-Are-The-Main-Benefits-Of-Comparing-Car-Insurance-Quotes-Online View photos