Now that I have discussed the significance of the Gaza genocide, what should we do now? In one extreme, some imply continued ethnic cleansing or genocide is OK. In the other extreme, some advocate for the use of force against Israel.
A more moderate approach may be a peacekeeping operation like United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon. However, given the number of UNIFIL peacekeepers the Israel Defense Forces has injured, and Israel’s general disdain for the UN, I think an operation under a different banner may hit a little harder.
That banner should be American. The first step should be Trump calls Netanyahu and demands an immediate ceasefire, or else all financial or military aid will cease. I once said we should continue providing defensive weapons to Israel to protect civilians, however, Hamas and Hezbollah have had their arsenals depleted or destroyed. For what remains, Israel’s current stockpile is enough.
Had a new ceasefire been announced, I might have supported the provision of interceptor missiles a year or two down the road. Instead Netanyahu announced another offensive.
The second step is to force aid into Gaza. Air drops seem great until one realizes they are too small and unsustainable. They have also crushed civilians to death. I believe President Trump should also demand Netanyahu and the IDF let all aid trucks into Gaza. The IDF may inspect the trucks, but they all must be let through rapidly.
If Netanyahu refuses, President Trump should gather our NATO allies and authorize a joint task force to deliver aid to Gaza’s coast. The U.S. Navy has the most extensive amphibious capability in the world. We could use an Amphibious Ready Group to launch Landing Craft Air Cushions and, if capable, Landing Craft Utilities and Longitudinal Care Managements with food trucks on board. We would coordinate with aid groups on the ground to have them safely receive and distribute the supplies to avoid something reminiscent of Israel’s disastrous Gaza Health Foundation, where Israeli troops and American mercenaries gunned down civilians.
Simultaneously, Trump should launch a public relations campaign, emphasizing how Netanyahu is forcing him to use U.S. troops to save civilians instead of, using classic Trump speak, “flipping a switch” and letting the aid trucks flow in. He should declare how he had to circumvent Netanyahu and the IDF to achieve this.
There are two problems with this plan. One is such a plan poses a minor risk to the troops involved. Two is that this, albeit better than the temporary dock or air drop plans, is still too complex and slow to be a long-term strategy.
Regarding the first problem, any basic study of Hamas’s mode of operations mitigates this risk. While there are reports of Hamas looting smaller undefended aid convoys and distribution points, both an internal U.S. government review plus the UN and various organizations have said this is far from widespread. The odds of a coordinated attack on U.S. forces, especially given Hamas’s current state, are near zero. This tiny risk is worthwhile given the genocide’s magnitude.
The second problem is part of the point: to show Israel’s most powerful allies have defied Netanyahu’s will and entered Israeli waters without permission simply to deliver less-than-adequate aid to starving civilians. This act would embolden other countries to act on their own, make Netanyahu’s reactionary governing coalition seem feckless to their domestic audience and demonstrate if Netanyahu does not institute a ceasefire and provide aid, we are willing to do what we want to save civilians. It is American arrogance utilized appropriately.
Faced with a NATO task force in Israeli waters and a complete cessation of aid, Netanyahu would almost certainly choose to let in more aid trucks the IDF can at least inspect and monitor. However, whether Trump ever pursues such an avenue is, admittedly, a pipe dream.
