Biden Administration Officials Should Be Held Accountable for Their Complicity in Israeli War Crimes

On July 11, New York Times Magazine She ran a deep article on how Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu extended the war in Gaza for political reasons. In addition to showing the Prime Minister obsessed obsessed with the preservation of his ruling alliance, and thus avoiding prison, he is ready to kill tens of thousands of Palestinians (and count), sacrifice the life of Israeli hostages, and turning his country into an international pariah, the article is another exhibition in the confusion of confusion against the prominent administration. US President Joe Biden is filmed by spinning as unfamiliar and fine, and Netanyahu is pushing to change the path and believe it when he says he will do and then feel crazy when Netanyahu is definitely. Repeated and over again.

The great American poet George W. Bush said, “Take me once, a shame for you. Take me – can not be deceived again.”

On July 11, New York Times Magazine She ran a deep article on how Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu extended the war in Gaza for political reasons. In addition to showing the Prime Minister obsessed obsessed with the preservation of his ruling alliance, and thus avoiding prison, he is ready to kill tens of thousands of Palestinians (and count), sacrifice the life of Israeli hostages, and turning his country into an international pariah, the article is another exhibition in the confusion of confusion against the prominent administration. US President Joe Biden is filmed by spinning as unfamiliar and fine, and Netanyahu is pushing to change the path and believe it when he says he will do and then feel crazy when Netanyahu is definitely. Repeated and over again.

The great American poet George W. Bush said, “Take me once, a shame for you. Take me – can not be deceived again.”

Even if Biden was deceived, he had no excuse to be. If he did not know exactly what was happening, it is certain that other senior members of his national security team. A few weeks ago, former Foreign Ministry spokesman Matthew Miller gave some news by saying that “without a doubt that Israel committed war crimes” in Gaza. But anyone with a smartphone already knows this. No collective abundance in history has been documented more comprehensively and broadcast in actual time by both victims and perpetrators. However, it was welded to come from a person like Miller, whose previous job was repeatedly denied that he saw evidence of any of them.

The founding lie on which the Gaza policy in the Biden administration was based was that the massive damage to civilians in Gaza was unintended. The truth is that civil harm is part of Israel’s strategy. As documented in the South African case before the International Court of Justice, a number of Israeli government officials were completely open about their intentions in this regard.

In addition to the huge reports in the actual time of this war, and most importantly by the Palestinians themselves, which is a talk New York The cover of the magazines written by Suzy Hansen provides the most detailed account after the Biden administration officials knew and when they know that. Along with Miller’s acceptance, he should put any claim that administration officials were not aware that war crimes were committed. However, they continued to provide weapons in a violation of American laws that prohibit doing so on the armies accused of credibility of total violations of human rights and restricting humanitarian aid.

It is worth treating the main arguments used by senior Biden administration officials, and continuing to use, to justify their role in this historical catastrophe. If you have caught any manifestation of former national security adviser Jake Sullivan where he was asked about this, you are likely to have seen a sign of it through it.

The first main argument is that the enemies of Israel could explain US weapons as an incentive to attack, which could lead to a regional escalation that the Biden administration wanted to avoid. This is doubtful on two basis. First, it is clear that with regard to the tremendous disappointment of Hamas, its supposed allies did not have Hezbollah and Iran an interest in joining the war beyond the symbolic symbolism of power. I haven’t seen any evidence that Biden used the influence of the United States to end the war changed this account. Second, when the war escalated at the end of the regional level, it was Israel that escalated, with the support of Biden.

Another argument is that maintaining arms supply enabled a level of the United States over the Israeli policy that had been lost if weapons stopped. In addition to the fact that this did not succeed clearly, one of the reasons why I find this claim is very strange is that some of the same people who have now rejected it previously.

In November 2018, 30 former Obama administration officials issued an open statement that supports cutting weapons to Saudi Arabia because of its brutal intervention in the war in Yemen. The signatories indicated that they had previously supported the Saudis “in an attempt to gain influence to push the coalition to abide by international humanitarian law and support parallel diplomatic efforts,” but this was, in the past, a mistake. Almost each of the sites will continue to work in the Biden administration. Some now justify their support for the Israeli Gaza war, specifically the terms that they regret to justify the support of the Yemen war in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Officials who provide this argument indicate that, through a great effort, are sometimes able to obtain more assistance in Gaza, than Israel had provided. Although we must admit that this aid caused a difference for these few people who would not have obtained it, this does not approach the exception of the cost of continuing to support the assault of Israel. I don’t think you should get a lot of credit to take advantage of the brakes from time to time for genocide.

But this is the thing: this is everything next to this point. Even if these justifications are logical, they did not ask the Biden administration constantly misleading the country and the world from Israel’s behavior. The administration could have used the legal assignment authority to continue support, saying that although there is clear evidence of an Israeli policy of preventing humanitarian aid, it is better to provide American security services by continuing to provide weapons instead of cutting them. This would be able to a honest discussion.

But they did not. They lied. repeatedly. Pray that they have not seen evidence of systemic violations. They resorted to strange combinations such as “many Palestinians who were killed”, as if there was an acceptable number that was overlooked. They said that Israel was not “doing enough” to facilitate the provision of humanitarian aid, demonstrating that the problem of politics was a logistical problem.

The Biden Administration was very committed to blocking the reality of Israel’s behavior to the point that it had created a complete new process for the purpose of preserving the illusion. Biden confiscated the White House in February 2024, the National Security Memorandum directed 20 the US State Department to “obtain some reliable written assurances from foreign governments receiving [U.S.] Defense articles, as appropriate, defensive services “that you will abide by and the international law of the United States. Of course, as expected, in the end, the administration has provided Israel with a clean health law, and weapons continued to flow. NSM-20 is claimed to be a new tool to ensure accountability. In fact it was just another shield against it.

In the past few months, I have met many former Biden administration officials, and the people who worked in the White House, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Pentagon. Most of them do not deny this. They admit that Israel was harmful to civilians and that the administration knew this at every level. They insist that they were backwardly against politics. My response to all of them was the same: Talk now and tell the truth about that.

But so far, I don’t see them talking about it. With very few exceptions-such as Andrew Miller, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Israeli-Palestinian Affairs, and Alan Goldberg, a former White House-not participating in any real person, not to mention anything that expresses the administration that suffers from this. Former Foreign Minister Anthony Blinken, the last New York Times The editorial on President Donald Trump’s strike on Iran, while his situation without shame to obtain credit for any possible successes, mentioned the word “Gaza” once.

So, what should the political class of the United States and voters do about it? This is an important question now after the Biden Administration officials have been reinterated into the foreign political establishment. While Matthew Miller’s recognition that he chose to be the general face of his boss, he explains that he should never be treated as trustworthy again, we have already known, and it is important that he spoke now, even if he is late.

We need to hear more of his colleagues about what they know and when they know this, and how efforts to change politics repeatedly by senior decision makers have been closed. We need to welcome the former officials who speak, even if it is very late, rather than attacking them to do so. Part of the alleged genocide in Gaza again – and this must be the dominant goal – is to create a space for people to tell us what they know in order to speak to the historical record about the error that occurred, and to do so sooner and not later.

We must also get to know these officials and appointed who spoke when it was important and took a professional risk by publicly resigning. Josh Paul, Tariq Habash, Harrison Man, Lily Greenberg, and Sysi Gilbert showed us what he means to be an honorable general employee. They had the courage to say no. They are the type of people that our country needs in the government.

Gaza Biden Policy Engineers are not. Unlike more novice officials, who may explicitly provide them with a final path to government service, the most responsibility for the disaster should not have a role in any future administration.

One of the arguments I heard from former administration colleagues and other Democrats is that we need to focus on the true threat of Trump and Trump and non -fighting within the Democratic Coalition. This repeats the words of former President Barack Obama in 2009, when he decided not to request legal accountability for the torture of the Bush administration: “We look forward to looking back.”

But this lacks two things. First, this is not simply “looking back”. Gen. Group is ongoing. It is happening now. It is, if there is anything, it is intensified. Accounting is necessary to prevent not only future crimes, but also to try to stop current crimes.

Second, Obama’s decision may have made a shrewd political meaning at the present time, but, such as the decision not to impose any consequences on the executives of companies who collapsed the economy in 2008, strengthened a system of elite impunity that eroded American democracy. The reason that Trump gets traction when he says that the “counterfeit system” is because of The system is forged. He is forged on behalf of the wealthy like Trump. It is forged on behalf of people who are well connected and influential, such as senior former government officials who do not face any consequences, legal, professional, or otherwise, to help and incite the worst imaginative crimes.

If we are serious about rebuilding American democracy, separating the system and ending this impunity is necessary. The struggle for the accountability of Gaza is inseparable from the fight against Trump.