The Biden administration’s approach to the escalating Israeli-Hamas conflict is revealing a disturbing trend: supportive in words but superficial in substance. President Joe Biden’s op-ed, while emphasizing the need for a two-state solution and supporting humanitarian pauses, contrasts sharply with his absence from a pro-Israel rally and his selective focus on specific hostage cases like Abigail’s, raising questions about the depth of U.S. support​​.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s recent admonishments to Israel’s war cabinet, suggesting Israel needs to find ‘better ideas’ to replace bad ones, underscore this superficial support. His statement, “The best way to kill an idea is to bring a better idea,” reflects a patronizing tone that diminishes Israel’s efforts against Hamas and shifts the burden of innovation onto Israel, undermining the support Israel needs to counter a persistent and existential threat​​.

The 2005 Disengagement from Gaza, which expelled ten thousand Israelis from the Gaza Strip. was pushed enthusiastically by the US on the Israeli government. Pitched as a way to handover an autonomous area to the Palestinian Authority, it was a terrible and tragic decision which resulted, within two years, in Hamas’s takeover. This failure highlights the need for a reevaluation of two-state strategies. The withdrawal, intended to foster peace, instead led to the region becoming a hub for aggression against Israel.

In response to Blinken’s challenge for better ideas, Israel must now propose and pursue bold, innovative solutions that better recognize the complex realities of the region. These include recognizing that Jordan is Palestine. The Kingdom, dominating a restive 80-90% Palestinian population, could well evolve into the Palestinian state separated from Israel by a river, a rift, and a defensible ridge – an idea that could redefine regional politics and resolve long-standing disputes.

Additionally, Israel must assert its legitimate presence in areas like Gaza, emphasizing its historical and cultural connections. This should include not just correcting the Disengagement fiasco, but reversing it, establishing an Israeli presence not just in the former Gush Katif but an expanded Israeli settlement presence in the northern Strip, protecting southern Israel.

Confronted with U.S. diplomatic pressure to limit its military operations and focus on humanitarian considerations, Israel must navigate a path that respects its sovereign right to defend itself while engaging with international concerns. Israel must insist on retaining control of a demilitarized area in northern Gaza as a security buffer and overall security control over the entire Strip for the forseeable future, to squelch any threatening terror actvity.

The involvement of enlightened Arab states is also crucial in efforts to denazify and re-educate the local population, fostering a culture of co-existence and facilitating the recognition of Israel. The UAE, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, could fund and regulate the reconstruction of infrastructure in Gaza, with Israeli help in building a smart technological foundation.

In conclusion, the Biden administration’s approach to the Israeli-Hamas conflict, while outwardly supportive, necessitates a deeper commitment that aligns with Israel’s security needs. Israel’s response to Blinken’s challenge must involve realistic and sustainable solutions that address both the security challenges posed by Hamas and the broader Israeli-Palestinian dispute.

Embracing innovative geopolitical solutions, like the Jordanian option, retaining control of strategic areas in Gaza, and collaborating with Arab states for regional re-education and peace-building are steps towards a lasting resolution that upholds Israel’s national security interests in a complex international landscape.

Rather than limiting Israel’s credit, the United States must extend it, providing all the necessary support to achieve its justified and obligatory war aims, including bringing home all Hamas hostages.

Any deviation from this full-throated support risks portraying the U.S. as a fair-weather friend, diminishing its credibility and influence in a region where steadfast alliances are crucial for stability and peace.