Critics argue that U.S. President Joe Biden's actions fall short of his rhetoric, as he continues to arm Israel while issuing tepid warnings.

Indeed, the White House has been continuously citing the imperative of defending Israel's right to self-defense as justification for ongoing military support in every press briefing. This reflects the complex calculus within the Biden administration.

The symbiotic United States-Israeli relationship has clear indications that the White House possesses leverage over Israel, both economically and politically, but it is desisting from employing this leverage. The administration's approach, ostensibly, involves a delicate balance of support and admonition. The challenge lies in the administration's ability to assert its influence decisively, navigating the fine line between support for Israel's security and accountability for its actions.

The Biden administration does not want any "unilateral" action and, instead, is seeking a coalition of European allies to hold Israel accountable through some sanctions. Israel's brazen defiance of President Biden has tarnished his credibility and raised concerns within his party. The left-wing among Democrats are demanding an end to Israel's aggression, condemning its violence against Palestinian civilians and forced displacement. Biden's cautious approach, marked by "quiet pressure," has weakened his standing in recent polls.

Virtual talks hint at Netanyahu's Rafah strategy

The recent virtual dialogue between Israeli and American officials regarding the potential incursion into Rafah reflects that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is going to play the Rafah card without restraint.

Although Washington, expressing apprehensions over the ramifications of such a move, is engaged in a diplomatic exchange ostensibly aimed at influencing Israeli decision-making, there is every reason to believe that Americans are also well aware of the fact that Netanyahu is not likely to put breaks on his barbarous plan to invade Rafah.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the head of the National Security Council of Israel, Tzachi Hanegbi, led the virtual discussions, which ended without any concrete indications about any possible delay in Netanyahu's Rafah agenda.

Rafah has turned into the world's most densely populated territory in the last five months, housing approximately 1.4 million individuals within a mere 65-square-kilometer (25-square-mile) area, a result of Israel's displacement of over half of northern Gaza's inhabitants.

The strategic significance of Rafah lies not in its military importance but in its potential as a political lifeline for Netanyahu. Rafah represents a pivotal opportunity for Netanyahu's political survival and absolution from legal troubles. While lacking geopolitical prominence, its symbolic value as a gateway for the forced expulsion of Palestinians underscores Netanyahu's ambition for what he terms "total victory." This vision entails the complete occupation of Rafah and the systematic expulsion of Palestinians, facilitated by its international connection with neighboring Arab countries.

Israel's calculated moves

In recent months, Rafah's population has surged dramatically, a result not of natural growth but of calculated Israeli tactics. Similar to Israel's role in exacerbating famine conditions in Gaza, the population influx in Rafah is part of a deliberate strategy aimed at reshaping demographics and consolidating control over contested territories, further complicating the already volatile regional dynamics. Netanyahu's purported concern for relocated residents, positioning them near the Egypt border for expedited aid delivery, echoes past instances of disingenuous compassion. This tactic mirrors Israel's deceptive claims, such as citing a command center within Gaza's hospital to justify military actions. The manipulation of humanitarian rhetoric to cloak political agendas typifies the cynical calculus of Netanyahu's power politics. While U.S. officials caution against a ground operation in Gaza, citing the dire humanitarian situation and the plight of trapped civilians, Israel remains resolute in its stance, emphasizing the necessity of a major attack on Rafah to quell the remaining Hamas battalions.

The rescheduled talks between Israel and the U.S., initially planned for the previous month, highlight the diplomatic tension surrounding Netanyahu's cancellation of Israel's delegation to Washington, D.C. This move was in protest of the Biden administration's decision not to veto a United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution calling for a cease-fire. The White House's decision to hold the meeting virtually is being projected as a "show of urgency" on the part of the U.S. to address the issue. Yet, White House spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre couldn't conceal the Biden administration's certainty that Netanyahu is unlikely to relinquish his intention to assault Rafah. "If they are going to move forward with a military operation, we must have this conversation. We have to understand how they're going to move forward," is how Jean-Pierre told reporters after the virtual session. Clearly showing that the White House residents are ready for the eventuality and unable to restrain Netanyahu from his vicious plan to unleash another round of bloodshed and terror in Rafah.

The U.S., in alignment with its European allies, advocates for alternative methods to target Hamas without resorting to an all-out invasion of Rafah. However, despite opposition from its European counterparts, Israel remains committed to its course of action, emphasizing the urgency of eliminating the Hamas threat. While urging restraint in Rafah, the Biden administration asserts no red lines in Gaza, allowing unhindered aid and arms transfers to Israel. This stance denotes the complexity of U.S. foreign policy in tackling the Gaza crisis while balancing strategic interests in the Middle East.

The fate of Rafah epitomizes the broader struggle for stability, security and justice in the volatile landscape of international relations. Rafah's plight epitomizes the intersection of geopolitics and human suffering, underscoring the imperative for principled leadership and genuine humanitarian action amid the tumult of conflict. Despite a notable shift in rhetoric following the Oct. 7 attack, doubts linger regarding the sincerity of Western leaders who previously endorsed Netanyahu's aggressive actions. Macron's recent condemnation of potential war crimes raises questions about his earlier silence amid mass displacement and destruction in northern Gaza. Similarly, the Biden administration's swift reversal, previously vetoing UNSC resolutions, raises eyebrows.

Criticisms mount on leaders

As scrutiny mounts, leaders face increasing pressure to demonstrate genuine commitment to upholding human rights and international law. The White House faced a diplomatic slap when Netanyahu canceled a planned visit by Israeli officials to discuss Rafah. Instead of responding firmly, Pentagon officials entertained Netanyahu's requests for additional weapons, fueling the genocidal conflict. The White House rushed to appease Netanyahu, rearranging the Israeli visit. Netanyahu's brazen disrespect, unprecedented among U.S. allies, is particularly astonishing given Israel's status as a top recipient of U.S. foreign aid and advanced weaponry. His impunity in insulting the U.S. without repercussions raises serious concerns about the integrity of their alliance. As Netanyahu continues to flout diplomatic norms, it underscores the need for the U.S. to reassess its relationship with Israel and ensure that such behavior is met with appropriate consequences to uphold the principles of mutual respect and cooperation.

Netanyahu, more than any other Israeli leader, excels in humiliating American officials to assert control. In 2010, he blindsided then-Vice President Biden by announcing settlement expansions during Biden's visit to Tel Aviv. Similarly, Secretary of State Antony Blinken faced humiliation as Israel announced land seizures for "Jewish-only" colonies during his recent visit. Netanyahu's tactics portray American officials as feeble and ineffective, enabling him to bend American policy to his will. This manipulation underscores the need for a reassessment of the U.S.-Israel relationship. Despite Blinken's efforts to broker peace and normalize relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel, Netanyahu disregarded American concerns, prioritizing Israeli interests over U.S. diplomacy. When Blinken raised objections to Israeli actions in Rafah, Netanyahu dismissively asserted, "U.S. support for Rafah op welcomed but not needed," showcasing his disdain for American input. Reports suggest that both the U.S. administration and Israeli military leaders view Netanyahu's notion of achieving "total victory" in Rafah as unrealistic.

However, Netanyahu treats American advice selectively, disregarding warnings and leaving the U.S. to manage the fallout. Unfortunately, American politicians, influenced by groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), often prioritize Israel's interests over their own country's, enabling Netanyahu's behavior. Netanyahu's actions underscore the need for a reevaluation of U.S.-Israeli relations.